Wild Justices response to call for evidence.

[lancer425]

56 minutes ago, panoma1 said:

Well WJ statement (if accepted by DEFRA) will ensure there will not be any of these species in Cornwall in the future!

Agreed and is exactly why it is highly unlikely it will be accepted by DEFRA.

[lancer425]

17 minutes ago, Walker570 said:

Fine on rifles as I use Barnes TSX and TTSX all copper bullets with great success, but shotgun loads are different. Just think of the thousands of beautiful and not so beautiful shotguns out there which will be for the scrap heap if we are pushed to shooting steel.  I have shot a lot of bismuth and I am 'on the fence' regards it's killing ability, I'm not sure it is as good as lead shot.

 

Lead is not necessary  in order to despatch animals and birds, in rifle and shotgun the alternatives are available and in all cases can match or out perform lead in the field .

What WJ want is not necessarily what they will get, l can not imagine DEFRA incorporating a lead restriction in to any of its  imminent  legislation. I imagine they will view these suggestions as being  of a low priority at this stage and put their efforts in to producing practical workable legislation as per their remit. I can not imagine them being unprofessional enough to compromise their reputation by being foolhardy enough to try and add the whimsical views of EJ ino their presentation, the fact they are involved in the first place is NE were lacking in their ability to compose a suitable workable licence, and in view of this fact i believe DEFA will want to play a straight bat on this one.  .

As for Non tox it  is as good as you want to make it, money plays a part agreed but non tox can in every respect beat Lead hands down. Even when you look at the poor man of non tox steel its performing and changes in gun and choke have it as efficient as lead in all practical terms, the arguments against steel have no grounding in fact any more, And i think in time we will see less lead being used, and i think this will come about through shooters themselves choosing non tox. Most wildfowlers are all too aware of non tox and what its capable of on the biggest avian quary our small island have and non tox is working, and even in pigeons many including myself chose to use steel in order to pass on any pigeons to falconers. There will be change in the years to come  but not necessarily via legislation.

[wymberley]

35 minutes ago, lancer425 said:

Lead is not necessary  in order to despatch animals and birds, in rifle and shotgun the alternatives are available and in all cases can match or out perform lead in the field .

What WJ want is not necessarily what they will get, l can not imagine DEFRA incorporating a lead restriction in to any of its  imminent  legislation. I imagine they will view these suggestions as being  of a low priority at this stage and put their efforts in to producing practical workable legislation as per their remit. I can not imagine them being unprofessional enough to compromise their reputation by being foolhardy enough to try and add the whimsical views of EJ ino their presentation, the fact they are involved in the first place is NE were lacking in their ability to compose a suitable workable licence, and in view of this fact i believe DEFA will want to play a straight bat on this one.  .

As for Non tox it  is as good as you want to make it, money plays a part agreed but non tox can in every respect beat Lead hands down. Even when you look at the poor man of non tox steel its performing and changes in gun and choke have it as efficient as lead in all practical terms, the arguments against steel have no grounding in fact any more, And i think in time we will see less lead being used, and i think this will come about through shooters themselves choosing non tox. Most wildfowlers are all too aware of non tox and what its capable of on the biggest avian quary our small island have and non tox is working, and even in pigeons many including myself chose to use steel in order to pass on any pigeons to falconers. There will be change in the years to come  but not necessarily via legislation.

Unless I've got hold of the wrong end of the stick and in which case I apologise, but having read through your posts on this thread I'm thinking that you keep changing your mind. As you are of the opinion - this point seems consistent - that NTS is more efficient than lead, are you or are you not in favour at its introduction and to such a degree that it replaces lead totally?

[lancer425]

39 minutes ago, wymberley said:

Unless I've got hold of the wrong end of the stick and in which case I apologise, but having read through your posts on this thread I'm thinking that you keep changing your mind. As you are of the opinion - this point seems consistent - that NTS is more efficient than lead, are you or are you not in favour at its introduction and to such a degree that it replaces lead totally?

I am in principle for NTS , but do not feel that legislation is the right way to bring about change. Shooters need education and need to see a real reason to want to use Non tox. So far any evidence there has been has been sketchy. And exactly why we are not looking at a lead ban now. Every body knows lead is toxic that is irrefutable and its contribution to the death of birds however fragile in fact was used as a pry bar to bring about the non lead shot legislation we have for wildfowl here now. Scotland as ever did a better job took a bit more time and in my opinion got it as close as you can do with a ban.

In an ideal world i myself believe it should have been voluntary and  more research and above all education available. As it was the research done was well meaning but in hindsight was quite wide of the mark, and it was basicaly down to the wildfowlers themselves to work out the way to get it working and bring about the industry changing attitudes and producing more effective ammunition which is now starting to improve from its early days. 

This approach was the wrong way IMHO it was forcing change when not enough time was allowed for people to adapt , to change attitudes to non tox, and we are where we are now still using lead in all but wildfowling and coastal wildfowling (wetlands etc ) in Scotland.

I think the voluntary uptake of non tox would have by now been greater and less shooters using lead than we have today by a broader more diverse range of hunters. it  would have been better if something like the  above ideas had been implimented from the time of the non lead legislation in England.

You would still have had some who ignored the call , this is the nature of people with anything, but a BAN is just that a BAN. Its gone ! final.  Hindsight is a wonderful thing i know, but if we had been given the opportunity of a voluntary option yet leave lead in place leg\aly, the attitudes i think would have changed. Now its mainly wildfowlers who know the real facts, other read and ok some will use non tox for various reasons ( Hawk Food ) but the vast majority of shooters are oblivious to non tox and its real abilities. Evidence of this is everywhere on this forum without looking anywhere else.

Talk of steel around the time of the LAG fiassco was wild on these boards, talk of wounded birds birds coming round and flying off it was sad to read, and just not real world with steel at all. In defence of these historical comments on the woes of steel, this is where the EDUCATION part needed to come in, what works what to use and where. Then hunters can make reasoned decisions on using non tox and get their equipment in order in their own time, i think would have been better approach in the long run.

Reducing lead shot use by just such means described would probably with the right encouragement and advice REAL ADVICE brought about hunters putting less lead in to our environment than we do today with just the wildfowlers compliant .  So Wildfowlings loss as brought about improvements vast improvements in non tox these days with way more potential performance than lead could ever dream of doing.  So starting now with advice EDUCATION and changing hearts and minds towards non tox is the way to go in reducing lead. As a wildfowler i do feel a little sad we never got a real try we were thrown in the deep end sink or swim.  Steel the most humble of the non tox works i genuinely dont think i would go back to lead given the option, its not all about pure performance either, steel is capably very capably if you get things right. Two generations of wildfowlers now have never known lead in England most of them must look at the steel negative comments with dismay i know i do. And trust me when i was pitched into this mess at the begining , i could see no light down that steel shot tunnel. Time heals most things non tox is no exeption, we need to bring about change i just dont think a BAN is the way to do it thats all. YOMV 

[old'un]

Lancer425

This is not a challenge to your post/s but more a question, I am not clear about, steel can outperform lead? “non tox can in every respect beat Lead hands down”?

[lancer425]

32 minutes ago, old'un said:

Lancer425

This is not a challenge to your post/s but more a question, I am not clear about, steel can outperform lead? “non tox can in every respect beat Lead hands down”?

Steel in the real world that is in my terminology SORTED STEEL IN THE RIGHT GUN AND CHOKE . CAN match lead on killing efficiencey up to ranges even pass shooting wildfowlers are content with.  Lead has more theoretical mass and lethality, but steel patterns generaly better so its not as cut and dried as just the mass or the maths.  So STEEL VS LEAD yes! & NO!.  Look at the Video linked above to see where steel is not left in the shadows of lead , steel is when used properly a real performer.

Now move away from steel copper bismuth ITX10 ITX13 HW 13 Hevi Shot and HW18& HW19 / TSS . you are seeing with copper less density but hard and better patterning . With Bismuth loaded correctly its indecipherable to tell from lead in the field in real world situations. Move up to the heavyweight shot and it is a case of how deep your pockets are and how much you want more lethality and just how much extra range you want or are capable of shooting at.   Put it this way Lead as the ultimate performing shot in town lost its crown some years ago heavier shot as took shotgun pellet efficiency up several levels over lead.   So non tox as real world pottential from steel the bargain basement non tox still working well enough, to the TSS toungsten shot styles givinbg the option to beat lead hands down admitted at a price.

 Your question OLDUN is precisely why we need better education on non tox Real info. so hunters can make choices long term drawing from facts not pre conceived inaccurate misconceptions from those that never gave it a real chance, or failed down to lack of proper advice. So we are back to the winning hearts and minds deal we do need to change how this comes about is up to us. i do not and i repeat DO NOT want a lead ban but we need change in the long run . .

 

[Vince Green]

There was a lot of talk about copper shot a few years back and then it dropped off the radar.

[lancer425]

1 hour ago, Vince Green said:

There was a lot of talk about copper shot a few years back and then it dropped off the radar.

Rotweiel and B7P do Copper or in B7Ps case duplex copper. Its toxic so the states wont take to it so i dont think the market is ever going to be swamped with it, and Bismuth dropping through the floor in comparison to the past ten years or so, Shot companies are making Bismuth which is not toxic and slightly denser and its available in bigger than 3.5 mm . Sadly the same can not be said for copper so Bismuth will be taking the lead at the moment. Some HW shot types are not exactly cheap but are just about affordable and i think a lot choose to pay a little more for these HW shots rahter than copper price and only in 3.5 mm. Big copper say 4.5 or 4.8mm i think there would be a bigger % use it than go to the trouble now. 

[NatureBoy]

Have a read of his Manifesto For Wildlife! Makes it clear they anti lead, pest control, grouse shooting, game shooting! Shooting in general! More carp  to come! Interesting that in it they slate NE and  state that  NE is not fit for purpose. It must of been written before NE pulled the GLs to.   SBS good lot! Well worth supporting!  NB

[mick miller]

How does non toxic (I question that term) work in rimfire? How does it work in heritage firearms? So, you have an old lever action used for competitor shooting, well that's you knackered isn't it? 

There's no need to introduce additional regulation on lead and lead shot, the perceived benefits vs risks are overplayed. 

Edited May 17, 2019 by mick miller

[wymberley]

31 minutes ago, mick miller said:

How does non toxic (I question that term) work in rimfire? How does it work in heritage firearms? So, you have an old lever action used for competitor shooting, well that's you knackered isn't it? 

There's no need to introduce additional regulation on lead and lead shot, the perceived benefits vs risks are overplayed. 

 One could be forgiven for thinking that as this talk of NTS is self generated and that WJ, NE et al do not require any encouragement from us, that PW has been infiltrated by a fifth column.

[lancer425]

1 hour ago, mick miller said:

How does non toxic (I question that term) work in rimfire? How does it work in heritage firearms? So, you have an old lever action used for competitor shooting, well that's you knackered isn't it? 

There's no need to introduce additional regulation on lead and lead shot, the perceived benefits vs risks are overplayed. 

This is where there needs to be rather than a BAN , a more flexible approach to non tox use, the rigid attitudes of a out and out BAn wont solve the problem. Lead is still being used, and trying to Ban lead as proved unsuccessful up to now. But not saying it wont come eventually but is that good. ? Well no of course its not, we need to look at reducing lead being put into the environment. And sorry but there as to be flexibility on both sides and we shooters are in no way innocent as a body more of us  are guilty of using lead way more than steel or non tox alternatives.

The Rimfires may have some lead free bullet available i know in the states handgun ammo is available in non tox so guess it could be done. and steel copper ball and polymer jackets have worked in slower ammo rather like those promethius air gun pellets . so ways around this i believe if not already available.

 As things are now (MY VIEW) nobody is moving not significantly, Wildfowlers were thrown in the deep end and we came out fighting, and remember we as a group shoot the biggest toughest birds we get on our islands, and remember humble steel is the main stay here not expensive alternatives.

If wildfowlers can get this to work its achievable on any game any  range we are going to shoot it, same for vermin or GL birds. So we have the alternatives.

We need to change and yet as pointed out antique guns old beautifull tradoitional guns are not able to use lead, RIGHT? Well not exactly in many cases they work just fine on steel (other hard shot) but accepting as is often the case these older guns need lead, then fine why ever not let them use lead, after all old cars can still use four star leaded fuel if they want to. Or use lead additives if the owner chooses. so why not guns?

And with newer steel compliant guns produced after a yet to be determined date, all must run non tox.   Now this i feel is not ideal but it gives the anti lead stalwarts the semblance of the control they so want to have.

In my ideal scenario there would be no need for a cut off point in gun manufacture, we as shooters would want to give up lead because we are real conservationists and even where hard evidence is not clean cut, we do recognise lead is toxic and we do want to do the responsible thing and reduce our lead footprint .  Sadly as it is now we are going nowhere any time soon, and even though we might have a bang up to date 682 gold E steel capable we are on lead down the clay ground we are on lead on the syndicate days we might just suffer steel on the pointless tame duck drive Saturday evening and moan about how poor it is for the next couple of weeks untill the next shoot where we will be again using lead because we can its legal.  This is IT! Where we are at . Inflexible set in our ways not in anyway open to change or common reason.  Effectively we are like boundary pushing teenagers not going to be happy until we are grounded and what we would not do voluntarily and with reservation is now forced upon us.

We are in a strong position at this moment in time on lead, the challenge to lead was unsuccessful and we still have it, so being seen to reduce the amount of lead we put out we will give ourselves the moral high ground and not forget long term help the environment.

A bored wildfowler sat in a weigh bridge office rambling into a phone and posting speech text on a pigeon shooting forum un punctuated and paragraphs there when ii paused for air, is not the be all and end all of the lead problem. But really Shooters are their own worst enemeys they wont move with the times, we need change let us change not let legislation decide lead shots fate, because then it will be gone completely and forever.

[lancer425]

1 hour ago, wymberley said:

 One could be forgiven for thinking that as this talk of NTS is self generated and that WJ, NE et al do not require any encouragement from us, that PW has been infiltrated by a fifth column.

No 5th column here i am 100% behind the cause, but anything i said here wont change anything, we will wait until its eventually banned then wait for the next pending ban ignore that then on and on until nothings left.  Change US!?  Never!  Steel is carp always has been always will be i know i heard a mate told me, he wounded a mallard one night with it.

So lets just keep using Lead its legal after and nothing matches it we all know that. Dont we.

[wymberley]

2 hours ago, lancer425 said:

No 5th column here i am 100% behind the cause, but anything i said here wont change anything, we will wait until its eventually banned then wait for the next pending ban ignore that then on and on until nothings left.  Change US!?  Never!  Steel is carp always has been always will be i know i heard a mate told me, he wounded a mallard one night with it.

So lets just keep using Lead its legal after and nothing matches it we all know that. Dont we.

Have said it before, I believe that our shoreline 'fowlers have done us proud and grasped the nettle. That's funny, ever since I first used steel against clays while coaching with BASC back in the 80s through Browning guns which were sent back at the end of the 'show' season to have the barrels checked for wear I was of the opinion that steel worked. It also worked when used in the field while I was also testing Zinc for the makers I found this also worked but not as well as steel - but naturally, the zinc had no future. I'm sure the current product works even better. However, NTS is not the be all and end all, but you're quite right, nothing economic does match lead in terms of outright performance. We need to be careful what we wish for and it's all too easy to give way too soon and too easily. For example what happened to, safe, effective, affordable and non toxic. Still, I suppose if one is happy with just 25%, then 'nuff said.

[Feltwad]

35 minutes ago, wymberley said:

 Have said it before, I believe that our shoreline 'fowlers have done us proud and grasped the nettle. That's funny, ever since I first used steel against clays while coaching with BASC back in the 80s through Browning guns which were sent back at the end of the 'show' season to have the barrels checked for wear I was of the opinion that steel worked. It also worked when used in the field while I was also testing Zinc for the makers I found this also worked but not as well as steel - but naturally, the zinc had no future. I'm sure the current product works even better. However, NTS is not the be all and end all, but you're quite right, nothing economic does match lead in terms of outright performance. We need to be careful what we wish for and it's all too easy to give way too soon and too easily. For example what happened to, safe, effective, affordable and non toxic. Still, I suppose if one is happy with just 25%, then 'nuff said.

Has a shooter of original muzzle loaders and early breech loading hammer guns with Damascus barrel  the ban on lead shot will  see the end of my shooting , steel and Damascus barrels do not work , the ban on lead for fowling saw my big bore fowlers  pensioned of to the cabinet.

Feltwad

Edited May 17, 2019 by Feltwad

[wymberley]

14 minutes ago, Feltwad said:

Has a shooter of original muzzle loaders and early breech loading hammer guns with Damascus barrel  the ban on lead shot will  see the end of my shooting , steel and Damascus barrels do not work , the ban on lead for fowling saw my big bore fowlers  pensioned of to the cabinet.

Feltwad

Precisely why we should not allow ourselves to be ridden roughshod over.

[lancer425]

5 minutes ago, Feltwad said:

Has a shooter of original muzzle loaders and early breech loading hammer guns with Damascus barrel  the ban on lead shot will  see the end of my shooting , steel and Damascus barrels do not work , the ban on lead for fowling saw my big bore fowlers  pensioned of to the cabinet.

Feltwad

Exactly and this is why us shooting reducing the amount of lead we use as in genuinely reducing it with evidence to back it up, will mean they the opposition to lead that is will have less impact on any final decisions. Your situation is exactly why we must fight for lead, but that is not just carrying on willy nilly and running lead at everything and anything just because we can. We need as a community to take responsibility, and change, and in the vast majority of cases using steel or if we like other non tox will change nothing in our performance in fact as a real chance of improving performance .

 If we are seen to be reducing lead usage i personally believe we strengthen our hand a lot and people in your scenario can that way still continue to use lead with no restrictions.

Monitoring lead use activity is a non starter in this respect, its got to come from everyone and be genuine as in cartidge companies just not selling any where near as much lead, evidence like this will count and perhaps stop a all out lead ban.

[lancer425]

2 minutes ago, wymberley said:

Precisely why we should not allow ourselves to be ridden roughshod over.

And i dont think any of us are alowing this to happen, but i do think we need to be calling the shots not a out of touch bunch of anti hunting control freaks.

 I doubt even this government are stupid enough to accentually implement this extremist groups plans, but i do think we need to look at cleaning up our act ourselves, and i think this will come about b y education and good info.

Apart from wildfowlers you only need to look at posts on here to see quite a lot are oblivious to non tox and how it works in the field.  Look how some on here fight steels corner, and why! ? Because they use it they know what it does, and the vast majority could more than get by with steel alone without involving other more expensive options.

Steel has been shrouded in mystery myth and mayhem since it inception here, a good start might be if the info general available was updated amended to show more factual info, much of the early info was not clear confused by cip and sami rules and i can not help but think if we had better resources available with real world performance and facts on what can be used and in what, we would get more using steel.

Prime example the full choke with steel debate, ask your run of the mill shooter about chokes and you will get the no more than half choke quoted, where in actual fact it is and always has been safe to use steel through a full choke.

The whole i have seen guns damaged by steel deal. Guns get damaged even with lead, but damage directly accountable to steel, is if any always going to be down to a secondary factor, badly loaded ammo home load or factory makes no odds, but if proper components are used and data benefiting the gun steel is being used in , steel is as safe as ANY other shot type.

Your dads old 700 webley wont desolve as soon as you put Steel through it, well my dads old 700 webley has not let me put it that way.

 Info is what needed and a change of heart to try and prevent a out and out ban which i think will ultimately come if we dont try other options, just digging our heals in and being stubon wont work and we will lose lead if we are not carefull.

 

 

[The Mighty Prawn]

Several clay grounds by me don't allow steel - I guess as they're very wooded and the ricochet risk from steel is too high?

[lancer425]

1 hour ago, The Mighty Prawn said:

Several clay grounds by me don't allow steel - I guess as they're very wooded and the ricochet risk from steel is too high?

If it is only the type of shot involved making its use on a clay target safe or not, is it safe in the first place. High as in 5% or 6%  antimony lead shot is hard enough to ricochet this is used in most commercial clay ammo. only reloaders will perhaps drop soft lead but not usual commercial ammo.

Steel varies in DPH and surface anhealing mirage ammunition for example uses softer steel shot that will combat any ricochet potential if any that exists, so it is a surmountable problem, that is if it even is a problem. Clay grounds taking this line because they can and hiding behind insurance .  health and safety or fear of litigation are just avoiding steel because they can, if it was ever the case lead was banned. i dare say in under a week the steel they were sudden forced to use would become uncannily safe overnight.

No steel if you wear proper eye protection is fine on clays when there was an ammo shortage a few years ago clay grounds around here in lincolnshire were moving lots of gamebore steel and it was cheap and no one got hurt then why now.?

SAome people have a strong prejudice of steel and if there isnt a problem they will think of one regardless.  this is where the education comes in and then we might get a change in attitude and get to keep lead where we need it rather than it all going.

 

[old man]

On 15/05/2019 at 14:35, panoma1 said:

I agree, what has licensing the control of avian pest species got to do with protectionists, except for the fact they don't like it! What has it to do with them and how does it affect them? If they really cared, they would support lethal control of the common predatory avian species, if it conserved at risk and red listed birds!

They are extremist animal protectionists/rewilders trying to impose their opinion on others! The problem is, like everyone who shouts loud and long, they eventually get what they want.......especially if it fits a perceived 'Green/PC' agenda and get's them 'off the backs' (path of least resistance) of the regulatory authorities!

You missed the joyful situation of being well acquainted to those with regulatory powers?

[Scully]

6 hours ago, lancer425 said:

And i dont think any of us are alowing this to happen, but i do think we need to be calling the shots not a out of touch bunch of anti hunting control freaks.

 I doubt even this government are stupid enough to accentually implement this extremist groups plans, but i do think we need to look at cleaning up our act ourselves, and i think this will come about b y education and good info.

Apart from wildfowlers you only need to look at posts on here to see quite a lot are oblivious to non tox and how it works in the field.  Look how some on here fight steels corner, and why! ? Because they use it they know what it does, and the vast majority could more than get by with steel alone without involving other more expensive options.

Steel has been shrouded in mystery myth and mayhem since it inception here, a good start might be if the info general available was updated amended to show more factual info, much of the early info was not clear confused by cip and sami rules and i can not help but think if we had better resources available with real world performance and facts on what can be used and in what, we would get more using steel.

Prime example the full choke with steel debate, ask your run of the mill shooter about chokes and you will get the no more than half choke quoted, where in actual fact it is and always has been safe to use steel through a full choke.

The whole i have seen guns damaged by steel deal. Guns get damaged even with lead, but damage directly accountable to steel, is if any always going to be down to a secondary factor, badly loaded ammo home load or factory makes no odds, but if proper components are used and data benefiting the gun steel is being used in , steel is as safe as ANY other shot type.

Your dads old 700 webley wont desolve as soon as you put Steel through it, well my dads old 700 webley has not let me put it that way.

 Info is what needed and a change of heart to try and prevent a out and out ban which i think will ultimately come if we dont try other options, just digging our heals in and being stubon wont work and we will lose lead if we are not carefull.

 

 

I'm not getting into another debate on steel or lead...it's been done to death over a long period; the anti view was found wanting in many aspects to the point of deceitful. 

I have nothing against the use of steel anymore than I have against the use of lead; my only concern was your willingness to replace lead with steel as a 'compromise' to a suggestion by Avery, by which we would be allowed to shoot pigeons as a game species!  

[silver fox 1]

38 minutes ago, Scully said:

I'm not getting into another debate on steel or lead...it's been done to death over a long period; the anti view was found wanting in many aspects to the point of deceitful. 

I have nothing against the use of steel anymore than I have against the use of lead; my only concern was your willingness to replace lead with steel as a 'compromise' to a suggestion by Avery, by which we would be allowed to shoot pigeons as a game species!  

 Well said, and another concern of mine is what happens when they attack  Game shooting  if they manage to get this  band we lose the pigeon shooting as well back to square one 

[AYA117]

Never mind about the lead debate, wait until the modern obsession with plastic catches up with us. So no plastic wads and a lead ban.....................

[lancer425]

2 hours ago, Scully said:

 

I have nothing against the use of steel anymore than I have against the use of lead; my only concern was your willingness to replace lead with steel as a 'compromise' to a suggestion by Avery, by which we would be allowed to shoot pigeons as a game species!  

I am not suggesting anything resembling a compromise, just pointing out the obvious really . Lead is toxic, we have to reduce the lead in our environment and this is why we use non lead fishing weights inland and unleaded fuel and any number of lead free alternatives solder. pipe work its endless.

Wildfowling dropped lead via legislation, lead is going to go if averey campaigns or not, at what point do we start the change then?

Do we wait for this to happen here. Todays news.

https://www.independent.ie/business/farming/forestry-enviro/environment/over-100000-guns-could-be-banned-under-new-eu-rules-38117388.html

We need to get our act together start being responsible try and stop an outright ban, and if we are very lucky we might just keep lead in place.

1. do we just carry on until they take lead. because it wont be long.

2. do we genuinely all try and reduce the amount of lead we shoot wile we still have time, and let our actions show we are using less lead and any used is low and essential for the likes of (feltwads old muzleoaders) older guns, and hopefully get no ban imposed.

3 whats your plan then. How are we going to stop it getting baned as in wildfowling.

48 minutes ago, AYA117 said:

Never mind about the lead debate, wait until the modern obsession with plastic catches up with us. So no plastic wads and a lead ban.....................

That is hopefully being addressed though, bio degradable wads are out there now we should be able to get around this, if it happens. .

Edited May 17, 2019 by lancer425