Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Sharpshooter.123

Lead ban & BASC

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, Old farrier said:

Probably the same with heavy shot bismuth and home loads your gun wasn’t proofed with them 

But bismuth was proved to be the lead alternative that any shotgun could use was it not? But this is going to end up in a rather interesting court case i reckon because theres no point saying that any gun can use standard steel so long as its not choked more than half but remember one manufacturers half choke might be tighter than anothers. And an old gun that just scrapes through on wall thickness so legally in proof might still blow up because the proof refers to lead ammunition

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm guessing that there will be formal advice from the proof houses; what that would be - I don't know.  However it might be along the lines of Non HP steel within the proof limits (i.e. case length, weight) through less than ?? choke is suitable without reproof.  IF that was to be the case, the insurance should be satisfactory.  Please note that this is simply my opinion - not either a gunmakers or insurance or legal experts opinion.  I am none of those!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Old farrier said:

Probably the same with heavy shot bismuth and home loads your gun wasn’t proofed with them 

Well I don’t shoot heavy shot or bismuth much to expensive and why would my guns not be proofed for home loads if my loads are proofed by Birmingham to comply with CIP?  
Not quite the same as being told or forced (won’t be long before we are) to use a cartridge in a gun that the gun was never designed for or never proofed for.  But easy to solve basc and the other organisation can get together and pay for our guns to be proofed and if they fail buy us a new one, sounds good to me.

 

Edited by rbrowning2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, rbrowning2 said:

Well I don’t shoot bismuth much to expensive and why would my guns not be proofed for home loads if my loads are proofed by Birmingham to comply with CIP?  
Not quite the same as being told or forced (won’t be long before we are) to use a cartridge in a gun that the gun was never designed for or never proofed for.  But easy to solve basc and the other organisation can get together and pay for our guns to be proofed and if they fail buy us a new one, sounds good to me.

 

Totally agree 👍

I was just tipping a few worms out of the can that’s been opened 😉

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From basc website - will this be the end for high bird shooting

Recent developments in soft steel shotgun cartridges should provide alternatives to lead suitable for all normal game-shooting ranges. Such ammunition is safe in the modern guns that are generally used for high bird shooting.

So that’s a YES then, the gun may be suitable for the ammunition but the ammunition is only suitable for normal shooting ranges, not high birds.

Their is some rubbish on their FAQ, like new technology, the wads eley are using were being used in 2013 seven years ago.

Edited by rbrowning2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Scully said:

Yes, but unless we all submit our non steel shot guns to reproof FOR steel, then what choice do we have but to use them for steel? If there's a lead ban then they're obsolete and worthless.

On that note, it will be interesting to see how this lead ban effects prices of all those guns not proofed for steel but still merrily in day to day use. 

Who's paying for that though? The only gun i own that steel proofed is my auto. I certainly hadn't planned on buying anything new enough that I would be steel proofed when I go back to O/U's 

It's that and as has been said previously in the thread, the cheap budget autos that a now pretty cheap 2nd hand, are the prices going to go sky high because the vast majority are 3" steel proofed?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, rbrowning2 said:

So that’s a YES then, the gun may be suitable for the ammunition but the ammunition is only suitable for normal shooting ranges

...which covers the vast majority of us shooters.  The biggest problem (for many of us) at the moment is the older and venerable English guns - which cannot take a 2 3/4" cartridge.  At present there is no steel available in 2 1/2" as far as I know - and I have heard that Hull have tried some - so maybe that will come out before the 5 year point?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said:

...which covers the vast majority of us shooters.  The biggest problem (for many of us) at the moment is the older and venerable English guns - which cannot take a 2 3/4" cartridge.  At present there is no steel available in 2 1/2" as far as I know - and I have heard that Hull have tried some - so maybe that will come out before the 5 year point?

Indeed, basc are suggesting  a maximum of 24gm of steel shoot in old guns or use bismuth.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The word "ban" is being used but this is so far a request to transition (the organisations can do no more than ask) so talk of them paying for reproof etc. is a bit premature.

As for so-called high pheasants (beyond typical range) then just buy a 3 1/2"  gun under a thousand new and a few hundred Mammoths because that is peanuts if you can afford that sort of shooting. The Vintage Shotguns site (Diggory Haddoke ?) has some constructive thoughts on 2 1?2" guns. I am sure we will get there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, rbrowning2 said:

Indeed, basc are suggesting  a maximum of 24gm of steel shoot in old guns or use bismuth.

 

Well, I'm going to wait and see what is around - and what advice my gunsmith friend gives me - but I do most of my shooting at sensible ranges with a 2 3/4" AyA anyway ......... so I suspect I will find a solution

Just now, Pushandpull said:

The Vintage Shotguns site (Diggory Haddoke ?) has some constructive thoughts on 2 1?2" guns. I am sure we will get there.

I posted a link to this earlier in this thread (about halfway down page 3 of the thread)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said:

...which covers the vast majority of us shooters.  The biggest problem (for many of us) at the moment is the older and venerable English guns - which cannot take a 2 3/4" cartridge.  At present there is no steel available in 2 1/2" as far as I know - and I have heard that Hull have tried some - so maybe that will come out before the 5 year point?

I watched a video from TGS earlier, I believe Johnny said something about one of the manufacturers possiblily Eley loading a 2 1/2" case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's no point in saying this is not a ban it's just a request to transition. You can bet your backside the government have already seized upon it and are going to sign it into law asap as the major organisations support it they can expect little in the way of backlash and as it can be deemed as a green thing to move away from lead then it's easy as a point scoring exercise. A transition in 5 years? They have literally written a penalizing law and handed it to the government. Absolute bootlickers the lot of them

Edited by Rob85
Spelling

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Farmboy91 said:

I watched a video from TGS earlier, I believe Johnny said something about one of the manufacturers possiblily Eley loading a 2 1/2" case.

I think (and hope) it will come - and at a sensible price!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said:

I think (and hope) it will come - and at a sensible price!

It could be like 410 and 28 bore loads now, premium prices due to the small number of guns compared to 12's or they maybe reasonably priced initially to get people on side.

 

29 minutes ago, Scully said:

Us, as in you and me. 

Mmm ideal, I'll pay out a bit more on the guns I've already paid out for.

The more time that passes ( not even been 24 hours 😂) the more it stinks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have written this to the editor of Shooting Gazette:

Dear Editor,

As a student of International History and Politics at Leeds University back in the late 1970s I was taught many things. One was the classic propaganda technique of the small truth and the big lie.

That is you tell a small truth and follow it with a big lie. People know that the truth is true....you can prove it...so what follows that is also said must also be true.

Reading today's statement on the BASC website and their FAQs reminded me of those West Yorkshire days. All the elements were there. That "small truth" not once but three times in fact. To support the big lie that it is necessary to end the use of lead on all shoots, by all shooters and for all quarry species edible and non edible.

Here:

1) Despite Brexit, we are expecting that these regulations will be implemented in the UK either due to a requirement to sell lead free game into Europe, or by UK legislation.

And

2) Concerns around the use of lead shot limit the current market for game products, and retailers are increasingly asking for game that has been shot with non-lead alternatives.

Then

3) Additionally, lead has been progressively removed from other substances, such as petrol and paint.

All true to a great or lesser extent and yet all do not make true the "big lie" that lead shot as a means to kill live quarry must fall.

1) Nobody knows what trade deal we will get post-Brexit. Boris Johnson doesn't. Michael Gove doesn't. Yet apparently BASC does? The EU may ban all British poultry and game regardless of if it has been shot with lead or non-lead so unless there is a crystal ball at Marford Mill it is speculation and navel gazing.

And in any case this is disingenuous. For if the EU can have a ban on USA chlorine washed chicken yet at the same time allow access to the EU to US non-chlorine washed chicken then this is clear that any such EU ban might not be a blanket ban at all UK game but just a ban on UK game shot with lead.

2) Surely it is for the individual shoot to decide if it wants to limit its outlets its surplus shot game and for it to continue to use lead if it does not mind that or as many do share it all with no surplus to sell between guns, beaters and pickers up?

Not all edible game is sold to retailers and yet why should those many shoots were it is not be then subject to these restrictions on using lead shot? Just as it is for the individual game dealer to decide whether he or she wishes to take such product or not take such product?

3) Paint and petrol. And a so the ban on lead in cartridges is justified? BASC shame on you! And those other organisations that have clung to its coat tails. Doctor Goebbels would truly have been proud of this...the classic small truth and big lie! Lead in paint and petrol is harmful yes. So therefore we must ban lead in shot gun cartridges?

Lead in petrol is air borne as I think a vapour or a gas containing microscopic particles that could be and were inhaled. I do not know the physics nor the chemistry of it but I do know that what comes out car exhaust pipe is not at all remotely the the same as a the two hundred and seventy small round balls of solid metal in an ounce load of English number six.

And finally for nearly five years from 2015 to 2019 I both worked and lived in France. Where as we all know the game dealers of Europe were always calling out for oven ready crows, jays and magpies to sell to customers to eat. And yet the the announcement today call on an end to lead shot for such corvids, and for squirrels and for foxes?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, enfieldspares said:

I have written this to the editor of Shooting Gazette:

Dear Editor,

As a student of International History and Politics at Leeds University back in the late 1970s I was taught many things. One was the classic propaganda technique of the small truth and the big lie.

That is you tell a small truth and follow it with a big lie. People know that the truth is true....you can prove it...so what follows that is also said must also be true.

Reading today's statement on the BASC website and their FAQs reminded me of those West Yorkshire days. All the elements were there. That "small truth" not once but three times in fact. To support the big lie that it is necessary to end the use of lead on all shoots, by all shooters and for all quarry species edible and non edible.

Here:

1) Despite Brexit, we are expecting that these regulations will be implemented in the UK either due to a requirement to sell lead free game into Europe, or by UK legislation.

And

2) Concerns around the use of lead shot limit the current market for game products, and retailers are increasingly asking for game that has been shot with non-lead alternatives.

Then

3) Additionally, lead has been progressively removed from other substances, such as petrol and paint.

All true to a great or lesser extent and yet all do not make true the "big lie" that lead shot as a means to kill live quarry must fall.

1) Nobody knows what trade deal we will get post-Brexit. Boris Johnson doesn't. Michael Gove doesn't. Yet apparently BASC does? The EU may ban all British poultry and game regardless of if it has been shot with lead or non-lead so unless there is a crystal ball at Marford Mill it is speculation and navel gazing.

And in any case this is disingenuous. For if the EU can have a ban on USA chlorine washed chicken yet at the same time allow access to the EU to US non-chlorine washed chicken then this is clear that any such EU ban might not be a blanket ban at all UK game but just a ban on UK game shot with lead.

2) Surely it is for the individual shoot to decide if it wants to limit its outlets its surplus shot game and for it to continue to use lead if it does not mind that or as many do share it all with no surplus to sell between guns, beaters and pickers up?

Not all edible game is sold to retailers and yet why should those many shoots were it is not be then subject to these restrictions on using lead shot? Just as it is for the individual game dealer to decide whether he or she wishes to take such product or not take such product?

3) Paint and petrol. And a so the ban on lead in cartridges is justified? BASC shame on you! And those other organisations that have clung to its coat tails. Doctor Goebbels would truly have been proud of this...the classic small truth and big lie! Lead in paint and petrol is harmful yes. So therefore we must ban lead in shot gun cartridges?

Lead in petrol is air borne as I think a vapour or a gas containing microscopic particles that could be and were inhaled. I do not know the physics nor the chemistry of it but I do know that what comes out car exhaust pipe is not at all remotely the the same as a the two hundred and seventy small round balls of solid metal in an ounce load of English number six.

And finally for nearly five years from 2015 to 2019 I both worked and lived in France. Where as we all know the game dealers of Europe were always calling out for oven ready crows, jays and magpies to sell to customers to eat. And yet the the announcement today call on an end to lead shot for such corvids, and for squirrels and for foxes?

 

More eloquently put than I ever could. Bravo. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, enfieldspares said:

I have written this to the editor of Shooting Gazette:

Dear Editor,

As a student of International History and Politics at Leeds University back in the late 1970s I was taught many things. One was the classic propaganda technique of the small truth and the big lie.

That is you tell a small truth and follow it with a big lie. People know that the truth is true....you can prove it...so what follows that is also said must also be true.

Reading today's statement on the BASC website and their FAQs reminded me of those West Yorkshire days. All the elements were there. That "small truth" not once but three times in fact. To support the big lie that it is necessary to end the use of lead on all shoots, by all shooters and for all quarry species edible and non edible.

Here:

1) Despite Brexit, we are expecting that these regulations will be implemented in the UK either due to a requirement to sell lead free game into Europe, or by UK legislation.

And

2) Concerns around the use of lead shot limit the current market for game products, and retailers are increasingly asking for game that has been shot with non-lead alternatives.

Then

3) Additionally, lead has been progressively removed from other substances, such as petrol and paint.

All true to a great or lesser extent and yet all do not make true the "big lie" that lead shot as a means to kill live quarry must fall.

1) Nobody knows what trade deal we will get post-Brexit. Boris Johnson doesn't. Michael Gove doesn't. Yet apparently BASC does? The EU may ban all British poultry and game regardless of if it has been shot with lead or non-lead so unless there is a crystal ball at Marford Mill it is speculation and navel gazing.

And in any case this is disingenuous. For if the EU can have a ban on USA chlorine washed chicken yet at the same time allow access to the EU to US non-chlorine washed chicken then this is clear that any such EU ban might not be a blanket ban at all UK game but just a ban on UK game shot with lead.

2) Surely it is for the individual shoot to decide if it wants to limit its outlets its surplus shot game and for it to continue to use lead if it does not mind that or as many do share it all with no surplus to sell between guns, beaters and pickers up?

Not all edible game is sold to retailers and yet why should those many shoots were it is not be then subject to these restrictions on using lead shot? Just as it is for the individual game dealer to decide whether he or she wishes to take such product or not take such product?

3) Paint and petrol. And a so the ban on lead in cartridges is justified? BASC shame on you! And those other organisations that have clung to its coat tails. Doctor Goebbels would truly have been proud of this...the classic small truth and big lie! Lead in paint and petrol is harmful yes. So therefore we must ban lead in shot gun cartridges?

Lead in petrol is air borne as I think a vapour or a gas containing microscopic particles that could be and were inhaled. I do not know the physics nor the chemistry of it but I do know that what comes out car exhaust pipe is not at all remotely the the same as a the two hundred and seventy small round balls of solid metal in an ounce load of English number six.

And finally for nearly five years from 2015 to 2019 I both worked and lived in France. Where as we all know the game dealers of Europe were always calling out for oven ready crows, jays and magpies to sell to customers to eat. And yet the the announcement today call on an end to lead shot for such corvids, and for squirrels and for foxes?
 

Very well put 👍

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Price could get very interesting over the five year transition period.

why, because at this time as we know their is a lot of competition in cartridge manufacturing, with uk made cartridges mainly made with components imported from the EU and then the EU cartridges imported. Profit margins are relatively small as a consequence of the competition from lots of manufactures.

but this is not the case if you take once use plastic out of the equation, then you have as far as I know only the choice of three wads or possibly four wads;  the cardboard cups that gamebore invented, the pva type eley use, the plant resin type bioammo are manufacturing unique to their cartridges and the photo degradable type gualandi once listed, if they meet the biodegradable criteria and are for steel shot.

None are cheap, and excluding the Gualandi offering as it not on their website , only one is available on the open market.

who ever controls the wads controls the price of the cartridges, with far less choice of manufacture than we have today and as we have left the EU their is no guarantee the EU manufacture will want to or need to supply the UK cartridge manufactures with the biodegradable wads.

eley will be ok as owned by the Spanish and the parent company is massive and could buy out the manufacture of the pva wads and the new Spanish bioammo company if they decided to.

what better way to drive up profit margins, than by limiting the availability of the wads.

so will be interesting to see how this all unfolds.

I have had to check twice today that it is not the 1st April.

 

 

 

Edited by rbrowning2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps someone could give me an answer ?

Very interested to see ALL the Gameshooting representative associations voicing their collective opinion about the horrors of Lead shot .

But note that the CPSA is not involved and that Clayshooting will not have to conform to the Lead ban .

Could one of your Scientists please tell me the amount of Lead and plastic deposited into the environment by Gameshooting compared with Clayshooting which use a substantial amount more of Lead cartridges every week per annum?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Salopian said:

Perhaps someone could give me an answer ?

Very interested to see ALL the Gameshooting representative associations voicing their collective opinion about the horrors of Lead shot .

But note that the CPSA is not involved and that Clayshooting will not have to conform to the Lead ban .

Could one of your Scientists please tell me the amount of Lead and plastic deposited into the environment by Gameshooting compared with Clayshooting which use a substantial amount more of Lead cartridges every week per annum?

Clayshooting will be affected when the production of lead shot is stopped............

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Almost 20 years ago the wildfowling community was hit with the first lead ban. The world stood still for a moment and there was much weeping into beer and wringing of hands.

Fast forward a few years and, although fowling might have some other issues to contend with, steel shot and it`s effectiveness is NOT one of them.

We`ll look back at this in a few years time and wonder what all the fuss was about.

 

.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I`m hoping there`s a good reasoning behind the actions that the Orgs have taken but have to think that the total lack of open discussion pre announcement smells of either a cave in or stitch up....it does seem very underhanded at this moment in time. 

The genie is out of the bottle and they`ve burnt the bridge,that is certain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, mudpatten said:

Almost 20 years ago the wildfowling community was hit with the first lead ban. The world stood still for a moment and there was much weeping into beer and wringing of hands.

Fast forward a few years and, although fowling might have some other issues to contend with, steel shot and it`s effectiveness is NOT one of them.

We`ll look back at this in a few years time and wonder what all the fuss was about.

 

.

I truly hope so, yours was at least a legal ban not a self inflicted voluntary one.
We need a like option.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...