Lead ban & BASC

[lancer425]

1 minute ago, motty said:

The fibre cups aren't particularly good. Not many wildfowlers (that i know of) use them.

I realise that, but if improved upon as in lets say a stouter construction, it might make a difference.

I have no experience with them up to now, but talked with a Mate in scotland today, he said they worked ok with smaller steel up to about 4s maybe 3s, but he had bigger shot breaking through. He used them up on duck loads. never bought any more.

 Not ideal i know could they be beefed up. ?  i heard of foil wrappers inside the cups from one lad but not sure what or if that improved anything.

[Perazzishot]

Can I throw one fact out there, without getting embroiled in everything else. Everyone of those shooters who shoot within Forestry Commission land or managed woodlands are going to have your permissions taken away from you when lead is no longer an option. Steel shot in trees is a total no go scenario. 

Everybody including BASC up until 23/12/19 were against steel shot, and this has been submitted to the ECHA, and BASC has thrown us under a bus subsequently when the full report is not under review until 2022. I have the paperwork!

At which point we will not be part of the EU and our biggest game market will be Asia.

How a squirrel or Rook will matter if killed with lead or non toxic will ever effect our ability to trade in the EU will ever matter I don't know. But one thing is for certain the EU desire fore game can only be supported via the UK input. Regardless of what shot is being used!

We have been right royally shafted to this point!

[lancer425]

5 minutes ago, AULD YIN said:

This is the email i got today and  this is the one i asked if  any other members has the same email from their orgs

SACS CLARIFICATION STATEMENT ON LEAD SHOT Dear SACS Member, Following the cartridge manufacturer's joint statement today, SACS wishes to clarify that it is our understanding that cartridge manufacturers were consulted on the proposed five-year transition from lead shot in live quarry shooting with shotguns. Please find below our full clarification statement. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact SACS Director Alex Stoddart on 07879 550750. Best wishes, The SACS Team

Exactly so who are we backing.  Our representative bodies, or the commercial cartridge companies who claim  not to have been consulted.

   Add to this i do not think we yet know exactly what was behind the  whole shooting orgs announcement.   we need to wait today’s cartridge cos statement was a surprise , but it could be they did not like being pushed.

 

 

[lancer425]

3 minutes ago, Perazzishot said:

Can I throw one fact out there, without getting embroiled in everything else. Everyone of those shooters who shoot within Forestry Commission land or managed woodlands are going to have your permissions taken away from you when lead is no longer an option. Steel shot in trees is a total no go scenario. 

Everybody including BASC up until 23/12/19 were against steel shot, and this has been submitted to the ECHA, and BASC has thrown us under a bus subsequently when the full report is not under review until 2022. I have the paperwork!

At which point we will not be part of the EU and our biggest game market will be Asia.

How a squirrel or Rook will matter if killed with lead or non toxic will ever effect our ability to trade in the EU will ever matter I don't know. But one thing is for certain the EU desire fore game can only be supported via the UK input. Regardless of what shot is being used!

We have been right royally shafted to this point!

Though i agree with that entirely , Why have they taken this action now. ?

 Do you not think there will have been something that they knew that we do not that prompted this?

It all came a little too sudden, the nudeness to me smells of WJ had they some  plan afoot akin to the GL s this time last year . ?

Packham patting wildfowlers on the back the other day, is there something there. as in Wildfowlers non lead VS game shooters Lead.  Is this all part of something on these lines.

Sorry for lots of questions but i think we are not privy to all of this just yet.

[AULD YIN]

32 minutes ago, lancer425 said:

Exactly so who are we backing.  Our representative bodies,  the commercial cartridge companies who claim  not to have been consulted.

   Add to this i do not think we yet know exactly what was behind the  whole shooting orgs announcement.   we need to wait today’s cartridge cos statement was a surprise , but it could be they did not like being pushed.

 

 

It would be better put

My representative body (SACS) who claim they understood the cartridge  companies  had been consulted or the commercial cartridge companies who claim  not to have been, now what  sounds more plausible ?

lancer  are you affiliated to BASC  30 pages, you average 4 or more posts per page ,makes a  LOT of posts JUST ASKING

[Perazzishot]

37 minutes ago, lancer425 said:

Though i agree with that entirely , Why have they taken this action now. ?

 Do you not think there will have been something that they knew that we do not that prompted this?

It all came a little too sudden, the nudeness to me smells of WJ had they some  plan afoot akin to the GL s this time last year . ?

Packham patting wildfowlers on the back the other day, is there something there. as in Wildfowlers non lead VS game shooters Lead.  Is this all part of something on these lines.

Sorry for lots of questions but i think we are not privy to all of this just yet.

It is the million dollar question, why now for what reason, an explanation in not obvious.

The evidence given to this point to the ECHA was looking favourable to retain lead shot for the foreseeable future, this impasse over the UK with Government approval has certainly put a huge spanner in the the thinking.

For it to be that off furnishing the refrigeration cabinets of Waitrose and M&S seems to be a hell of a sacrifice across the board.

The narrative appears to have gone to the point where the heaviest lead cartridges available in 5 years time will be 28g 6.5 clay loads with the manufacturers agreement. 

As it stands under the voluntary code that won't happen! However within the next 5 years we can and dare say will be subject (without objection from BASC etc)  to government legislation. 

Basically meaning we will not be able to purchase a lead cartridge above 28/6.5 in plastic wad lead. 

Over the next few years BGA (the main driver) will not collect game from any estate where they still allow lead to be used. After all they have spent the last 2 years putting out of business the small game dealers in certain areas making estates dependent on the BGA.

We are heading blindly into very murky waters!

We had the chance to stand shoulder on shoulder with our european counterparts on this who on a whole were rejecting any restriction on lead. This decision as one of the if not the biggest user of lead has let down the whole community.

It really is a sad state of affairs!

 

[Perazzishot]

May I add much to peoples perception of myself. This is whole heartedly across the whole shooting fraternity going to have huge implications from game shooting, pigeon shooting, wild fowling, fox shooting and vermin shooting. Lets not forget this is a lead and plastic wad give away. The report I have suggests that the alternatives to lead are not only in some cases prohibitive due to cost the cheaper options are far more toxic and dangerous to the environment than lead. These reports have been submitted to ECHA on the 23/12/19.

The ruling as per 2022 when a EU decision is made on the report I have seen without lead as an option, Bismuth (or similar) would be the option, it wouldn't be steel!

Currently not being mined and cost per shell rising for factory loads to £1+ per shot.

The death of shooting by stealth and a 1000 cuts!

 

 

 

Edited February 29, 2020 by Perazzishot

[matone]

...which has always been the strategy of our opponents....

[ClemFandango]

5 hours ago, Perazzishot said:

Can I throw one fact out there, without getting embroiled in everything else. Everyone of those shooters who shoot within Forestry Commission land or managed woodlands are going to have your permissions taken away from you when lead is no longer an option. Steel shot in trees is a total no go scenario. 

Everybody including BASC up until 23/12/19 were against steel shot, and this has been submitted to the ECHA, and BASC has thrown us under a bus subsequently when the full report is not under review until 2022. I have the paperwork!

At which point we will not be part of the EU and our biggest game market will be Asia.

How a squirrel or Rook will matter if killed with lead or non toxic will ever effect our ability to trade in the EU will ever matter I don't know. But one thing is for certain the EU desire fore game can only be supported via the UK input. Regardless of what shot is being used!

We have been right royally shafted to this point!

Or they could just use one of the softer alternatives. 

[rbrowning2]

7 hours ago, motty said:

Well, no, they wouldn't be creating the correct plastic wad. It wouldn't BE plastic!

I firmly believe that firms are already well underway with developments of new wads. It can't be that much of a secret what the ingredients etc are in Eley's wads.

Motty, their is things like patients and IP that will be in place protecting the not inconsiderable investment that the Spanish company behind the pva wads that eley are using, that’s how a business expect to eventually make a return on their investment it stops anybody Stealing their inventions.

The patient on the gamebore fibre cups has expired last time I looked but they may have renewed it or still own the IP rights.

Obviously the uk cartridge manufactures know far more than we do so we must assume as eley and gamebore are both part of the statement they jointly made that their is no wonder wad on the horizon and that increasing production of either the pva wad or cardboard cup wad will not be a quick process or has other manufacturing limitations which will keep the cost of the cartridges at a silly price for the average shooter.
Such limitation as they are only in 12gauge are expensive and that cartridge production speed must be very slow, given the pva wad needs the petals of the case mouth of the cartridge welding together to keep any moisture out otherwise the shelf life of the cartridge could be in days or weeks as the wad dissolves within the cartridge.

Also PVA (polyvinyl alcohol) is a type of 'polymer' or plastic.

 

Edited February 29, 2020 by rbrowning2

[islandgun]

6 hours ago, lancer425 said:

Though i agree with that entirely , Why have they taken this action now. ?

 Do you not think there will have been something that they knew that we do not that prompted this?

It all came a little too sudden, the nudeness to me smells of WJ had they some  plan afoot akin to the GL s this time last year . ?

Packham patting wildfowlers on the back the other day, is there something there. as in Wildfowlers non lead VS game shooters Lead.  Is this all part of something on these lines.

Sorry for lots of questions but i think we are not privy to all of this just yet.

Could it be a sop to WJ. We give you lead, if you let us rear and release more Pheasants

[rbrowning2]

1 minute ago, islandgun said:

Could it be a sop to WJ. We give you lead, if you let us rear and release more Pheasants

Hope they don’t think that because as a fairly frequent visitor to mark Avery blog I would conclude the type of shot is yes a stick to beat us with but not the be all and end all, releasing non native birds and persecution of raptors are bigger issues for them.

 

[JohnfromUK]

3 minutes ago, islandgun said:

Could it be a sop to WJ. We give you lead, if you let us rear and release more Pheasants

Don't think anyone would trust WJ to stick to a deal.  I wouldn't trust them. 

Mind you my trust in organisations is currently at a 'low'.

[islandgun]

I didn't mean release more than is currently released, but as a bargaining chip when the inevitable negotiations start regarding number of birds per hectare allowable

[mick miller]

12 hours ago, ClemFandango said:

You really don't have a clue. 

There are already non lead alternatives for .22lr and viable alternatives for .223 and .243 that have been in use for a couple of years. 

As for the ballistics of monoliths being like "artillery." that's ******** too. 

Tell me how a 100gr 243 copper monolithic will stabilise in any factory 1 in 10 twist? It won't, looks like you're the one who is clueless. 

That's the 243 no longer deer legal for large species in Scotland, and likely England and Wales too. 6.5 pushing a 120gr copper solid is going to be the new minimum. 

Who compensates owners for that when it kicks in? 

[Farmboy91]

50 minutes ago, islandgun said:

Could it be a sop to WJ. We give you lead, if you let us rear and release more Pheasants

You can't argue with ignorance, there will never be any give and take with WJ. It will be a big fat zero to the number of Gamebirds and that will be that.

[Old farrier]

12 minutes ago, mick miller said:

Tell me how a 100gr 243 copper monolithic will stabilise in any factory 1 in 10 twist? It won't, looks like you're the one who is clueless. 

That's the 243 no longer deer legal for large species in Scotland, and likely England and Wales too. 6.5 pushing a 120gr copper solid is going to be the new minimum. 

Who compensates owners for that when it kicks in? 

Same person who compensates all the people with small bores and shorter chambers in the shotgun 

there’s no need for you to be compensated you can still use it at the moment and at the range plenty of time to develop new loads 

[rbrowning2]

Got it we can all start using depleted uranium after all i think it penetrates tank amour so should suite are needs perfectly and I bet the atomic industry would be pleased for us to get shot of it for them lol 

[Smokersmith]

I'm not 100% sure it fits with non-toxic ambition 

[mick miller]

But then, nor does copper. 

[JohnfromUK]

39 minutes ago, mick miller said:

Who compensates owners for that when it kicks in? 

There will be no compensation.

No one is compensated for these 'positive' environmental changes.  Not for you older diesel car, your gas boiler, and all of the other things we will have to gradually move away from.

Handguns were a little different - and I think that people were quite lucky to have got something there - as public opinion (which was very anti handgun) is what brings votes and votes are what governments want. 

Taxpayers money being used to compensate rich shooting types for the retirement of their Purdeys?  Not a chance!

[rbrowning2]

5 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said:

Handguns were a little different - and I think that people were quite lucky to have got something there - as public opinion (which was very anti handgun) is what brings votes and votes are what governments want. 

I think they learnt at expensive lesson with the handgun ban it cost in the end a lot of money to compensate the owners, now they just stop new sales and stop any current owners from selling the gun, so when the owner gives up or dies the banned gun must be handed in.

thinks that how it now works, hence no compensation payments.

[southeastpete]

So if a lead ban actually came in, and all these little guns couldn’t be used with steel, would they become ‘obselete calibres’? And not need a licence?

[Old farrier]

Moving forward 

for any of this to be workable there needs to be a readily available and accessible cartridge that meets the criteria 

non toxic degradable wad that is mass produced effective and safe 

with a level of affordability to the mass shooting population 

Ideas on how this can become available 

the box has been opened and for now we must work together to try to make a future for shooting 

[JohnfromUK]

1 minute ago, southeastpete said:

So if a lead ban actually came in, and all these little guns couldn’t be used with steel, would they become ‘obselete calibres’? And not need a licence?

No - you can still get 'effective' ammunition from a police point of view.  No escape there!