lancer425 Posted March 19, 2020 Report Share Posted March 19, 2020 should we start to phase out lead over the next five years then negotiate a ban when and if the government decide they want one. YES OR NO ANY further text limit it to five words please. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TIGHTCHOKE Posted March 19, 2020 Report Share Posted March 19, 2020 Yes, we have to! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smokersmith Posted March 19, 2020 Report Share Posted March 19, 2020 Bigger issue than five words Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clangerman Posted March 19, 2020 Report Share Posted March 19, 2020 unfortunately unless this is a anonymous poll i can’t see us getting a honest opinion when people could take flack for it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andrewluke Posted March 19, 2020 Report Share Posted March 19, 2020 NO,it will happen,thanks BASC Just now, clangerman said: unfortunately unless this is a anonymous poll i can’t see us getting a honest opinion when people could take flack for it say what think,it will just be your own opinion,dont let others influence you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
old'un Posted March 19, 2020 Report Share Posted March 19, 2020 Vermin/pest control NO….game shoots shooting large numbers YES but only for the reason of making it more saleable, small numbers for your own consumption the shooter is free to choose, lead or steel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dangerous Brian Posted March 19, 2020 Report Share Posted March 19, 2020 Yes, It was going to happen anyway (just a quick glance at government stance indicates this). BASC et al are trying to get ahead of it (the way they are doing it is another discussion though) so we have a few options when the time comes. Nothing like a crisis to spur manufacturers on to develop solutions and I feel the "we can't do it in that time" response is a standard expectation management exercise (remember the manufacturers are the same guys who charge a premium for printing a pheasant on the box instead of a clay). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
panoma1 Posted March 19, 2020 Report Share Posted March 19, 2020 Yes! Jump before we’re pushed! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rbrowning2 Posted March 19, 2020 Report Share Posted March 19, 2020 Yes but doing both a move away from lead and non biodegradable wads in one step has doubled the price of cartridges in 12ga and very likely made all other gauges either wall hangers or bismuth shot. Still think we should have done similar to New Zealand and at least staggered the rollout, hitting the goal of lead free game first. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest cookoff013 Posted March 19, 2020 Report Share Posted March 19, 2020 i want to say no. lead is toxic to birds. we `ve been gouged enough on prices of shells. steel shells used to be £88/k they were that unpopular. no company alive today would ever see that again. thats just borderline price war. the big manufacturers have a monopoly on shells. probably thats why the 29gram, 21gram, 31gram loadings come to place because they shouldnt compromise premium loads. this now just gives the industry time to try and rip us off again. while retail is partly some issues. i`d like to see end to shells at £400 / k or more viable alternative with no quibbles. quality loadings for the game industry at reasonable prices. access to powders for a tinker. quality reasurance. new and interesting loadings such as an ounce of 4s / steel. quality subgauge ... steel shot is killing the subgauge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wymberley Posted March 19, 2020 Report Share Posted March 19, 2020 51 minutes ago, lancer425 said: should we start to phase out lead over the next five years then negotiate a ban when and if the government decide they want one. YES OR NO ANY further text limit it to five words please. I will play by the rules if you could explain in 5 words how we could negotiate when we have already revealed how far we're prepared to go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CharlieT Posted March 19, 2020 Report Share Posted March 19, 2020 Most definitely YES Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scully Posted March 19, 2020 Report Share Posted March 19, 2020 This is not a poll; it's just another thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeterHenry Posted March 19, 2020 Report Share Posted March 19, 2020 YES - begrudgingly, reluctantly, tactically, from necessity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vmaxphil Posted March 19, 2020 Report Share Posted March 19, 2020 I think we have to go steel because if game is unsaleable / unusable then it becomes target shooting which gives the antis all the ammunition they need ( pun intended) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salop Matt Posted March 19, 2020 Report Share Posted March 19, 2020 Yes - But over 10-20 years Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mick miller Posted March 19, 2020 Report Share Posted March 19, 2020 (edited) No. Let's get rid of unsustainable densities of released rear birds instead. The amount of lead (naturally occurring metal) will diminish inline with the reduction in released livestock (or are they wild - the game bird shooting industry never seems to be able to make its mind up on that). Fewer balls of lead means less ingestion, means fewer lead based avian mortalities. Simple. Plastic cartridge cases and wads, absolutely, get rid of them. Edited March 19, 2020 by mick miller Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
enfieldspares Posted March 19, 2020 Report Share Posted March 19, 2020 No. As MM above. I keep posting this link to New Zealand. And their law. Lead is just as poisonous in NZ as in UK. The nonsense from BASC is nonsense. This isn't about anything other than the "big bag" boys trying to justify saturating an environment with unsustainable densities of birds to then kill them as if they were so many feathered clay pigeons under the supposed justification that they can sell as food what then is shot. Lead use being irrelevant to game that isn't sold. https://fishandgame.org.nz/game-bird-hunting-in-new-zealand/hunting-regulations/non-toxic-shot-regulations/ And everybody else can go hang. There's suddenly money at BASC to fund an opposition to the Wild Justice judicial review of DEFRA's Game Release proposals but not money for a judicial review of the applicant having to pay for medical certification nor money for an all around study into actual impact of lead shot to the environment and/or coverts that have on many estates been shot over for a hundred years. But then we are merely no more than "mug punters" paying £80 a year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
strimmer_13 Posted March 19, 2020 Report Share Posted March 19, 2020 1 hour ago, old'un said: Vermin/pest control NO….game shoots shooting large numbers YES but only for the reason of making it more saleable, small numbers for your own consumption the shooter is free to choose, lead or steel. 100%. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andrewluke Posted March 19, 2020 Report Share Posted March 19, 2020 (edited) 37 minutes ago, enfieldspares said: No. As MM above. I keep posting this link to New Zealand. And their law. Lead is just as poisonous in NZ as in UK. The nonsense from BASC is nonsense. This isn't about anything other than the "big bag" boys trying to justify saturating an environment with unsustainable densities of birds to then kill them as if they were so many feathered clay pigeons under the supposed justification that they can sell as food what then is shot. Lead use being irrelevant to game that isn't sold. https://fishandgame.org.nz/game-bird-hunting-in-new-zealand/hunting-regulations/non-toxic-shot-regulations/ And everybody else can go hang. There's suddenly money at BASC to fund an opposition to the Wild Justice judicial review of DEFRA's Game Release proposals but not money for a judicial review of the applicant having to pay for medical certification nor money for an all around study into actual impact of lead shot to the environment and/or coverts that have on many estates been shot over for a hundred years. But then we are merely no more than "mug punters" paying £80 a year. BASC must already have plenty of money to fight the opposition, if you look at the the BASC pie graph it shows that a fair chunk of BASC subs goes into the "fighting fund", if it was up to me i would ban the export of shot game(pheasants,partridge) and the game go into pet food industry or feed the less well off,after all the shoots get peanuts for their game,i would also ban the sale of woodcock and all wildfowl, Edited March 19, 2020 by andrewluke Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackpowder Posted March 19, 2020 Report Share Posted March 19, 2020 I have requested figures of people who have suffered illness or death from eating lead shot game on several internet sites, still awaiting the first reply. Blackpowder Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scully Posted March 19, 2020 Report Share Posted March 19, 2020 1 hour ago, mick miller said: No. Let's get rid of unsustainable densities of released rear birds instead. The amount of lead (naturally occurring metal) will diminish inline with the reduction in released livestock (or are they wild - the game bird shooting industry never seems to be able to make its mind up on that). Fewer balls of lead means less ingestion, means fewer lead based avian mortalities. Simple. Plastic cartridge cases and wads, absolutely, get rid of them. See, it’s not a poll, but yet just another thread because people are going to express opinions also, which require a response, so here goes.....Its not about whether you regard large numbers of released birds as sustainable or not, because people are still going to pay to shoot large numbers ( if that’s what they like doing ) whether they’re using lead or not! What is it about this fact that you can’t seem to understand? Those who want to shoot large bags, and those who cater to those same people will still continue to do so....why on wouldn’t they? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greylag Posted March 19, 2020 Report Share Posted March 19, 2020 Going around in circles.Enough is enough.No real answers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lancer425 Posted March 19, 2020 Author Report Share Posted March 19, 2020 1 hour ago, wymberley said: I will play by the rules if you could explain in 5 words how we could negotiate when we have already revealed how far we're prepared to go. By following our shooting organisations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wymberley Posted March 19, 2020 Report Share Posted March 19, 2020 5 minutes ago, lancer425 said: By following our shooting organisations. They've already negated that option. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts