YES OR NO Phasing out Lead

[enfieldspares]

Thank you BROWNING B& for your sensible, reasoned  and IMHO spot on "Hits the Target" posting. 

In my view banning lead shot won't make shooting more justifiable!

It's those that are claiming that we need to lose lead shot or lose our shooting. The Org's and certain people involved in big let days etc and arguing hard that if we do not get game to table, and start using steel it will be difficult to continue fighting the attacks on shooting and it will be lost forever. I and others have argued that we (those involved with smaller shoots) have never had a problem with disposing game, everything we shoot is eaten regardless of what it's shot with (hence justifiable) . 

This move to push out lead is to protect the big shoots and improve their image. 

For the fact that UK doesn't look at the lead rules in New Zealand tells the truth that this proposed phasing out isn't anything more that about protecting the "big bag" boys and the rest....your syndicate of family and friends, the pigeon shooter, the squirrel shooter et al can all go hang.

I'll post this yet again. This is what they have in New Zealand:

https://fishandgame.org.nz/game-bird-hunting-in-new-zealand/hunting-regulations/non-toxic-shot-regulations/

Please other PW members if you think that the above, more or less, is the commonsense solution that we should have in the UK please put links to it where you can. Forward it to friends that shoot even.

[enfieldspares]

Quote

Many on here, advocate the taking of a brace or two home at the end of a driven days shooting, and that is to be applauded, but if you believe this, then I’m assuming you all stop shooting when you’ve shot a couple of brace each. If not then why not? Any surplus is shot for what reason? 

The above is flawed. many of our small syndicates shoot for the "craic" of the whole day. The arrival, the banter, the point at and having a laugh at someone's new wellies, or the merits of their new 4x4 pick-up. Then the chat about any topic except shooting in the wagon with fellow guns and fellow beaters. The mid-morning elevenses, the brought in home baked delights for the lunch and afterwards the leaving for home when the day is done and ALL the game that is harvested is shared between beaters, pickers up, guns and all.

On such shoots that I had the privilege to be part of there never was a surplus. Ever. For harvesting the game to be shared by all whether we took a brace or as I and some did as much as we could was also a major reason for the day. My and others first question to the Shoot Captain after the beaters and pickers-up had had their first picked was "How many each can we have?" Yes we shot for enjoyment but also, as a major major reason, we shot to harvest the birds we'd put down to mature in the wild until of eatable size.

Edited March 21, 2020 by enfieldspares

[wymberley]

"ALL hunters of upland game (all quail and pheasants) are exempted. That's because research has shown these birds are not affected because the shot "in the uplands" is so widely dispersed"

Copied the above from the New Zealand link. Because I don't know, does this indicate that there is no or very little driven game shooting there - I'm guessing that it does as that would make sense?

[lancer425]

12 minutes ago, wymberley said:

"ALL hunters of upland game (all quail and pheasants) are exempted. That's because research has shown these birds are not affected because the shot "in the uplands" is so widely dispersed"

Copied the above from the New Zealand link. Because I don't know, does this indicate that there is no or very little driven game shooting there - I'm guessing that it does as that would make sense?

New Zealand did try to be fair and imposed lead restrictions within 2 or 300 nyards of waterways etc. No non tox requirement for Upland pheasants quail etc. But even then anything under 12ga was still lead so 16s and 20s were all Lead waterfowling anywhere.

When i moved back here 5 years ago they were looking at making 20s non tox. but not sure if it changed or not. Its a better system there its like BASC and DEFRA are the same thing with the same official powers, just government ratification needed for changes. but they still get pressures just like we are now, but are not against their orgs to the same level as the UK shooters are. Disagree perhaps but its never the **** storm we get here, but F&G have real power, BASC can only dream about this. Its a good system, but DOC are not so clean cut thats like NE with some of Defras powers. I worked for DOC. For years Culling. 1080 was too much for me.

 NZ will be bringing in Non tox at some point and do not think will be long , F&G are up with foreign affairs and imagine they will be watching here with interest.

   Some states notably California has non tox upland rules, its a recognised issue, and they introduced it in cali first . Not sure exact date but year or so ago.

Typically what they use.

https://uplandjitsu.com/index.php/2019/08/30/choosing-non-toxic-ammo-for-upland-hunting/

[Scully]

51 minutes ago, enfieldspares said:

The above is flawed. many of our small syndicates shoot for the "craic" of the whole day. The arrival, the banter, the point at and having a laugh at someone's new wellies, or the merits of their new 4x4 pick-up. Then the chat about any topic except shooting in the wagon with fellow guns and fellow beaters. The mid-morning elevenses, the brought in home baked delights for the lunch and afterwards the leaving for home when the day is done and ALL the game that is harvested is shared between beaters, pickers up, guns and all.

On such shoots that I had the privilege to be part of there never was a surplus. Ever. For harvesting the game to be shared by all whether we took a brace or as I and some did as much as we could was also a major reason for the day. My and others first question to the Shoot Captain after the beaters and pickers-up had had their first picked was "How many each can we have?" Yes we shot for enjoyment but also, as a major major reason, we shot to harvest the birds we'd put down to mature in the wild until of eatable size.

It isn't flawed at all; many on here justify their shooting of game based on this premise, just as you're trying to justify it by referring to it as 'harvesting'! 

I can perfectly agree that there's more to a days shooting than just the shooting; the craic on our small syndicate days and our little rough shoot is wonderful; we extract the urine relentlessly, but nobody forgets to bring their gun because they're there for the same reason as you or I, and it's not to 'harvest' anything. The suggestion is ridiculous; we're not hay timing! 😄

Contrary to you, I have never been on a driven days shooting which doesn't create a surplus ( unless the birds simply weren't there ) but it's not a surplus which is wasted, all surplus is given away. Regardless of the numbers of birds we release, and what terminology we prefer to justify that, do you seriously believe that if the big commercial shoots go, the likes of you and I will be left to continue doing what we do? With or without lead? 

The big shoots are in business to make money, they aren't harvesting anything.  They're catering to a worldwide demand for driven days, and NOT for the demand for game meat. It is BIG money, whether those days be 'big bag' days, 'extreme' days or mediocre days, and they're selling days to create revenue, as we all know. Do you seriously believe that all us little shoots will survive without the big boys days? Of course this ( the phase out of lead ) has been mooted to protect the commercial shoots.

Like them or loathe them, without the big commercial shoots our shooting will be short lived; they just need to get their act together for the sake of all of us. Do any of us seriously believe the orgs give a flying monkey for the little shoots? Really? They are trying to create a demand for game meat by making the product more attractive to consumers, and if it is lead which puts off consumers then it will have to go.

If lead is banned, please tell me what is in place to prevent the big commercial shoots from carrying on as they do now with a non toxic alternative? Furthermore, what makes you believe that your type of shooting is more justifiable than any other type, whether you're using lead or steel or even gold ingots, to do your 'harvesting'? I have never seen one article from the antis referring to what we do as 'harvesting'....we're killing for sport. They're not stupid. 

 

[andrewluke]

3 hours ago, Scully said:

You ( and others ) are looking at this from the perspective of someone who assumes driven shoots ( of any size ) exist to cater to a demand for game meat....they don’t. None of them. Your shoot, my shoot, and everyone else’s shoot, exists because there are people who enjoy shooting. That’s you, me and everyone else in this forum. 
The ‘massive’ commercial shoots became so because of a demand for driven shooting, regardless of whether there was or is a demand for the by product...eg, dead birds. 
Like the ‘massive’ shoots, the lesser shoots, like yours and mine, exist for the sole purpose of the enjoyment, challenge, entertainment of shooting, and not because there is a demand for dead game birds. 

Many on here, advocate the taking of a brace or two home at the end of a driven days shooting, and that is to be applauded, but if you believe this, then I’m assuming you all stop shooting when you’ve shot a couple of brace each. If not then why not? Any surplus is shot for what reason? 
If lead is banned, would you stop buying and rearing those 100, 300, 500 birds you do each season, and then releasing them to shoot each season? If the answer is no, then why would you think the banning of lead will stop the ‘massive’ shoots from carrying on as you do?

There is NO demand for game birds on the same scale as there is for chicken, but there IS a demand to shoot game birds. Those who want to justify what they shoot need to create that demand, and if people won’t buy that product because it may contain a toxic metal, then it has to go. 
What would you rather do, lose lead or lose your shooting? 

well that's not what i think!,i know these big game shoots produce a vast amount of game that not many want(when dead) otherwise they would get more than 5p-10p a bird,they make their money by what dies(the more that dies the better) not what's eaten,so end up with alot of waste,yes i enjoy shooting but i enjoy it whether i fire a shot or not

[Scully]

10 minutes ago, andrewluke said:

well that's not what i think!,i know these big game shoots produce a vast amount of game that not many want(when dead) otherwise they would get more than 5p-10p a bird,they make their money by what dies(the more that dies the better) not what's eaten,so end up with alot of waste,yes i enjoy shooting but i enjoy it whether i fire a shot or not

Which is exactly what I’ve said! 🤔Those who want to shoot big bags or extreme birds do so because they enjoy it, regardless of whatever happens to the bag, and the big commercial shoots garner revenue from catering to that demand. It isn’t the responsibility of the paying shooter to find an outlet for the by product of their shooting.
It’s big business; they’re shooting for the pleasure they derive from it ( incidentally, just like you or me, albeit on a smaller scale ) and the shoot takes responsibility for the proceeds of that shooting. How long do you think commercial shoots would last if they stipulated  paying guns can only shoot two brace apiece? On a good day I’ve sometimes shot and killed fifteen birds, but I don’t take fifteen birds home with me. 
The only ‘waste’ I’ve seen on any shoot is those birds spoiled by close range shooting or bad handling, and on the BIG commercial shoot on which I beat, I haven’t seen any waste at all ( other than the examples I’ve given ) and all birds are placed in trays and then into the chiller ready for collection, whether it be 10 pence each or 10 pence a brace. 
What sort of ‘waste’ were you referring to? 

[wymberley]

Am I sensing this correctly? Are we (collectively, the majority, call it what you will) saying that the big bag shoots and the BASC et al are not the slightest bit concerned about the rest of us and their only interest is keeping the dosh circulating. Then, if this can be achieved, we'll get what morsels we can scrounge. Consequently, if so, the threat is is that if we don't tick the right box we have no more shooting. Nothing new here then, those who have the most will always fight the hardest to keep it.

I really can't believe my good fortune.

[Scully]

2 minutes ago, wymberley said:

Am I sensing this correctly? Are we (collectively, the majority, call it what you will) saying that the big bag shoots and the BASC et al are not the slightest bit concerned about the rest of us and their only interest is keeping the dosh circulating. Then, if this can be achieved, we'll get what morsels we can scrounge. Consequently, if so, the threat is is that if we don't tick the right box we have no more shooting. Nothing new here then, those who have the most will always fight the hardest to keep it.

I really can't believe my good fortune.

Basically yes, that's how I see it anyhow. In the same way that the CPSA has only the interest of clay pigeon shooting at heart. Nothing matters more to the shooting organisations than survival; they're in business too. The NGO exists solely for the purpose of game shooting; they may garner revenue from other sources of shooting, but it's for the sake of game shooting. They only have the best interests of game shooting and keepering at heart, why otherwise would a group of keepers split from BASC and create their own organisation? The answer is because those keepers believed BASC wasn't acting in their best interests.

Why did BASC become BASC and not simply stay as it was WAGBI, representing a minority of shooters within a minority sport? Because nobody was representing shooting basically, on a wide spectrum. The instigators of BASC saw a business opportunity and took it, the rest is history.

All our organisations push the insurance aspect of their organisations, and will accept money from any discipline of shooting, because they all want our money, but all that money goes towards whatever is in the best interests of the survival of the organisation; why wouldn't it? It's just business sense. The CPSA/BASC/NGO etc etc  will accept your money whether you're a black powder pistol shooter or a whirling dervish, but they wont represent what is in your best interest as a whirling dervish. Like the big commercial shoots, they're in business, and if the best interests of our shooting orgs is to support big commercial shooting, then that's what they'll do, whether it's in our best interests or not. 

I'm not saying that what they do isn't a good thing ( who would represent us at a ministerial level if they weren't there? )  just don't believe that the big orgs wont distance themselves from your particular 'sport' or discipline, and that you wont be sacrificed for the greater good. Commercial shooting is BIG business, generating millions each year, and other businesses will follow and support that business if their survival depends on it. 

[BrowningB7]

4 hours ago, Scully said:

You ( and others ) are looking at this from the perspective of someone who assumes driven shoots ( of any size ) exist to cater to a demand for game meat....they don’t. None of them. Your shoot, my shoot, and everyone else’s shoot, exists because there are people who enjoy shooting. That’s you, me and everyone else in this forum. 
The ‘massive’ commercial shoots became so because of a demand for driven shooting, regardless of whether there was or is a demand for the by product...eg, dead birds. 
Like the ‘massive’ shoots, the lesser shoots, like yours and mine, exist for the sole purpose of the enjoyment, challenge, entertainment of shooting, and not because there is a demand for dead game birds. 

Many on here, advocate the taking of a brace or two home at the end of a driven days shooting, and that is to be applauded, but if you believe this, then I’m assuming you all stop shooting when you’ve shot a couple of brace each. If not then why not? Any surplus is shot for what reason? 
If lead is banned, would you stop buying and rearing those 100, 300, 500 birds you do each season, and then releasing them to shoot each season? If the answer is no, then why would you think the banning of lead will stop the ‘massive’ shoots from carrying on as you do?

There is NO demand for game birds on the same scale as there is for chicken, but there IS a demand to shoot game birds. Those who want to justify what they shoot need to create that demand, and if people won’t buy that product because it may contain a toxic metal, then it has to go. 
What would you rather do, lose lead or lose your shooting? 

I understand your point but must disagree. I do shoot for the enjoyment of pulling the trigger, as well as all the other benefits like using hammer guns and seeing friends etc.  If I kill something it must be for a reason, putting it on a plate, protecting live stock etc, there must be justification (for me; this is how I was brought up). If I want a challenge for target shooting I'll shoot clays. 

If I'm on a syndicate with 8 guns and 4 beaters and it is known that no one will want more then a brace each, AND, the keeper or anyone elce could not pass them on, then I would insist that once we shot 24, we stop. I would be happy if I shot 2,4,6 or never pulled the trigger, that's game shooting. Its like those who shoot a woodcock but refuse to take it home, I wouldn't want them back on my shoot. 

If lead was banned would I stop putting birds down? I would have to consider why lead was banned. If it was due to evidence that game shooting with lead had major impacts on environmental issues or wildlife (not research from the past 20 years that also includes fishing weights and other lead found in water, or wildfowl found with lead on specific lakes - actual evidence of pheasant/partridge shooting on farm land) then I would probably move with it and buy a steel proof gun and continue. If lead was banned to protect those shooting more than they can eat and for those high up in org's to be invited and filmed on certain estates, then I would sell my collection of brownings and English guns (for what they would be worth!) and buy a little boat & get back into fishing. 

What would I rather lose lead or shooting? I suppose my above point sums it up. For the right reasons - lead. If lead was banned for the wrong reasons (encouraged by those supposedly meant to represent shooters) I would say **** it and walk away watching the anti's have a field day and those at the top take it down from the inside. 

[Scully]

Fair enough. Personally I don’t mind too much if I don’t get a shot either, especially on our rough shoot where I beat mostly as I like to watch others shoot who don’t get the opportunity as much as me, but I always take a gun. 
I sometimes don’t get a shot on syndicate days towards the seasons end, as we don’t release great numbers, but if it happened everyday I’d look for another syndicate; if I’m paying for it then I expect to shoot. The same applies to most people paying to shoot, whether it be pigeons, crows or game. 
I don’t eat woodcock but I do shoot them as I know someone who loves to eat them. Now I think of it there are many other kinds of meat I would choose before pheasant,  but although I do eat pheasant I don’t feel I need to justify why I shoot them.
Commercial shooting is just that, big business; it will go on with or without you or I, and without lead also. 

Edited March 21, 2020 by Scully

[Old farrier]

Perhaps someone can tell me the difference between 8 chaps shooting 800 pheasants in a day On a commercial  shoot providing a income for the land owner (to be sold into the food chain) 

and 

8 individuals shooting 100 pigeons each to protect a crop to enhance the profits of a land owner also (to be sold into the food chain) 

other than the jobs created on the commercial pheasant shoot for keeper Contractor planting cover crops under keeper beaters picker up game farms the local hotel and the ladies that prepare the lunch 

as a land owner which gives the best return

Why would you ban lead to shoot the pheasant and on the same ground leaving it legal to shoot the pigeon 

[lancer425]

15 minutes ago, Old farrier said:

Perhaps someone can tell me the difference between 8 chaps shooting 800 pheasants in a day On a commercial  shoot providing a income for the land owner (to be sold into the food chain) 

and 

8 individuals shooting 100 pigeons each to protect a crop to enhance the profits of a land owner also (to be sold into the food chain) 

other than the jobs created on the commercial pheasant shoot for keeper Contractor planting cover crops under keeper beaters picker up game farms the local hotel and the ladies that prepare the lunch 

as a land owner which gives the best return

Why would you ban lead to shoot the pheasant and on the same ground leaving it legal to shoot the pigeon 

NOTHING.?

You wouldn’t Pigeon are able to go into the food chain, and Steel shot pigeons do good money as Feed for birds of prey.

[Scully]

50 minutes ago, Old farrier said:

Perhaps someone can tell me the difference between 8 chaps shooting 800 pheasants in a day On a commercial  shoot providing a income for the land owner (to be sold into the food chain) 

and 

8 individuals shooting 100 pigeons each to protect a crop to enhance the profits of a land owner also (to be sold into the food chain) 

other than the jobs created on the commercial pheasant shoot for keeper Contractor planting cover crops under keeper beaters picker up game farms the local hotel and the ladies that prepare the lunch 

as a land owner which gives the best return

Why would you ban lead to shoot the pheasant and on the same ground leaving it legal to shoot the pigeon 

Good question, and in a similar vein; 20 small shoots each shooting 100 birds in one day,  and one commercial shoot shooting 500 each day over four days. 🤔

[Old farrier]

31 minutes ago, lancer425 said:

NOTHING.?

You wouldn’t Pigeon are able to go into the food chain, and Steel shot pigeons do good money as Feed for birds of prey.

Well perhaps the land owner makes more money from the pheasant shooting than he gains from giving the pest control (pigeon shooting) on the amount of extra crops he gets 

same amount of shot is going to end up on the ground 

1 minute ago, Scully said:

Good question, and in a similar vein; 20 small shoots each shooting 100 birds in one day,  and one commercial shoot shooting 500 each day over four days. 🤔

No difference other than the carbon footprint of the extra transport on the small shoots  

[Scully]

As an aside from all this, and no doubt much to the pleasure of some, have just heard from a man who is in a position to know, that a few of the big commercial shoots down country have stated they are going to knock it on the head this year, because of all the uncertainty caused by the Corona virus. 

Just now, Old farrier said:

Well perhaps the land owner makes more money from the pheasant shooting than he gains from giving the pest control (pigeon shooting) on the amount of extra crops he gets 

same amount of shot is going to end up on the ground 

No difference other than the carbon footprint of the extra transport on the small shoots  

👍

[wymberley]

4 hours ago, lancer425 said:

New Zealand did try to be fair and imposed lead restrictions within 2 or 300 nyards of waterways etc. No non tox requirement for Upland pheasants quail etc. But even then anything under 12ga was still lead so 16s and 20s were all Lead waterfowling anywhere.

When i moved back here 5 years ago they were looking at making 20s non tox. but not sure if it changed or not. Its a better system there its like BASC and DEFRA are the same thing with the same official powers, just government ratification needed for changes. but they still get pressures just like we are now, but are not against their orgs to the same level as the UK shooters are. Disagree perhaps but its never the **** storm we get here, but F&G have real power, BASC can only dream about this. Its a good system, but DOC are not so clean cut thats like NE with some of Defras powers. I worked for DOC. For years Culling. 1080 was too much for me.

 NZ will be bringing in Non tox at some point and do not think will be long , F&G are up with foreign affairs and imagine they will be watching here with interest.

   Some states notably California has non tox upland rules, its a recognised issue, and they introduced it in cali first . Not sure exact date but year or so ago.

Typically what they use.

https://uplandjitsu.com/index.php/2019/08/30/choosing-non-toxic-ammo-for-upland-hunting/

Cheers, will assume that that's a don't know.

[lancer425]

Just now, wymberley said:

Cheers, will assume that that's a don't know.

Not really don’t know. But lets put it another way for the hard of hearing in our midst. If Ladbooks would give me odds on it i would have a tenner on it .

[wymberley]

33 minutes ago, Scully said:

As an aside from all this, and no doubt much to the pleasure of some, have just heard from a man who is in a position to know, that a few of the big commercial shoots down country have stated they are going to knock it on the head this year, because of all the uncertainty caused by the Corona virus. 

👍

Understandable, but a shame never-the-less.

3 minutes ago, lancer425 said:

Not really don’t know. But lets put it another way for the hard of hearing in our midst. If Ladbooks would give me odds on it i would have a tenner on it .

Don't understand. The question was:

"Because I don't know, does this indicate that there is no or very little driven game shooting there?"

Unfortunately, owing to too many small fast jets, I'm also one of the hard of hearing in our midst.

[andrewluke]

41 minutes ago, Scully said:

As an aside from all this, and no doubt much to the pleasure of some, have just heard from a man who is in a position to know, that a few of the big commercial shoots down country have stated they are going to knock it on the head this year, because of all the uncertainty caused by the Corona virus. 

👍

BASC is trying to help

had this email on wednesday

Shooting season 2020/21

This time of year is critical for game shoots. The financial outlay of hatching, rearing and buying in chicks and poults is typically offset by deposits paid by Guns booking their shooting for the season ahead.

We would encourage people where their circumstances permit to go ahead and make bookings for the 2020/21 game shooting season; given the Prime Minister’s most recent announcements we hope shooting will continue as usual come autumn and winter, but it will only do so if we pull together as a community, keep calm and carry on.

[wymberley]

4 minutes ago, andrewluke said:

BASC is trying to help

had this email on wednesday

Shooting season 2020/21

This time of year is critical for game shoots. The financial outlay of hatching, rearing and buying in chicks and poults is typically offset by deposits paid by Guns booking their shooting for the season ahead.

We would encourage people where their circumstances permit to go ahead and make bookings for the 2020/21 game shooting season; given the Prime Minister’s most recent announcements we hope shooting will continue as usual come autumn and winter, but it will only do so if we pull together as a community, keep calm and carry on.

That's good, it pays to remember your roots:

[Robertt]

NO.

Once lead shots gone they'll find a problem with steel shot.

[andrewluke]

19 minutes ago, Robertt said:

NO.

Once lead shots gone they'll find a problem with steel shot.

[wymberley]

39 minutes ago, Robertt said:

NO.

Once lead shots gone they'll find a problem with steel shot.

They will if it's copper plated (washed).

[scarecrow243]

NO NO NO NO NO