Govt statement on lead shot

[Conor O'Gorman]

House of Commons - Written Answers - Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. Answered on: Tuesday 21 July 2020

Alexander Stafford (Rother Valley):

To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, if his Department will make an assessment of the potential environmental effect of reducing the use of lead shot in shooting sports and activities.

Victoria Prentis (Banbury):

Lead is highly toxic and most of its uses are regulated to prevent exposure to humans and the environment. Between 50,000 and 100,000 wildfowl are estimated to die each year in the UK due to lead poisoning from spent gunshot. Lead poisoning can also have a negative effect on other wildlife, especially scavenging raptors. That is why, in England, the use of lead shot is prohibited for shooting certain species of wildfowl and for use over certain sites of special scientific interest by the Environmental Protection (Restriction on Lead Shot) (England) Regulations 1999 (as amended).

Recently the EU Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH) Committee, which addresses the production and use of chemical substances and their potential impacts on human health and the environment, has proposed an amendment of the current EC regulation on the use of lead in gunshot over wetlands. The Government will consider the evidence review recently undertaken by the European Chemicals Agency and the proposal from the REACH Committee before deciding if any changes to UK regulations are required. The availability and effectiveness of alternatives to lead ammunition, such as steel and copper, will form part of the consideration.

On 24 February 2020, nine shooting organisations issued a joint statement calling for the end of using lead and single-use plastics in ammunition for live quarry shooting with shotguns over five years. We welcome this voluntary move and applaud these organisations for reaching this decision. It is a significant step for both wildlife and the wider environment.

The Government continues to support shooting activities which benefit the rural economy and the environment, including wildlife and habitat conservation.

https://www.parliament.uk/business/publications/written-questions-answers-statements/written-question/Commons/2020-07-14/74015/
 

[rbrowning2]

Why are 50,00 to 100,000 wildfowl estimated to die each year due to spent lead gun shot did we not go non toxic for wild fowling years ago? Same old, same old. Are you pleased with what the MPs have written or not? What’s the purpose, agenda of your post?

 

[enfieldspares]

Quote

Recently the EU Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH) Committee, which addresses the production and use of chemical substances and their potential impacts on human health and the environment, has proposed an amendment of the current EC regulation on the use of lead in gunshot over wetlands.

So can I ask a direct question? Were or are there ANY proposals by the EU REACH committee to restrict the use of lead over land other than that which is classed as "wetlands"?

Edited July 22, 2020 by enfieldspares

[rbrowning2]

9 minutes ago, enfieldspares said:

So can I ask a direct question? Were or are there ANY proposals by the EU REACH committee to restrict the use of lead over land other than that which is classed as "wetlands"?

Any help?

https://echa.europa.eu/-/call-for-evidence-on-possible-restriction-of-lead-in-shot-bullets-and-fishing-tackle

[enfieldspares]

No, sadly, not really, as the link is a call for evidence not AFAIK a statement of proposals now being made by EU REACH following the submission of that evidence? But that leads to another question. What was the evidence that BASC submitted? can we see it please?

[Farmboy91]

I'm pretty sure I heard Robert Everitt of Hull Cartridge saying that after one tide the average depth of a peice of shot is around 18 inches, the chances of it being ingested by wildfowl are minimal.

If I can find the podcast I heard it on I'll post word for word what he said and where he got the information from. 

50,000 to 100,000 is a pretty large guess, because let's face it that's what it is.

[B725]

How many of the estimated 50_100k of dead bird's have actually been found and proven to have swallowed lead shot.

[clangerman]

6 minutes ago, Farmboy91 said:

after one tide the average depth of a peice of shot is around 18 inches, the chances of it being ingested by wildfowl are minimal.. 

50,000 to 100,000 is a pretty large guess, because let's face it that's what it is.

18 inch’s? what are they using to feed with shovels if the numbers were anything like as high we would be knee deep in corpses non stop whoever came up with the number clearly can’t count 

[rbrowning2]

2 minutes ago, clangerman said:

18 inch’s? what are they using to feed with shovels if the numbers were anything like as high we would be knee deep in corpses non stop whoever came up with the number clearly can’t count 

It’s the same number that has been around for what years now, so obviously the use of non toxic shot is of zero benefit.

as I said same old, same old, BASC still trying to save face and commercial game shooting, by mixing wild fowling in with game shooting to justify the voluntary ban on lead shot.

 

[Cannon]

50-100,000 is a lot of birds. How does someone come up with that figure? It's all guesswork not backed up by evidence from what I can see. Scaremongering and playing right into the hands of the antis.

[Farmboy91]

6 minutes ago, clangerman said:

18 inch’s? what are they using to feed with shovels if the numbers were anything like as high we would be knee deep in corpses non stop whoever came up with the number clearly can’t count 

Yes, rather large ones at that.

I can get behind the removal of single use plastics no problem, the removal of lead shot is the biggest unfunny joke to come out in a long time. 

The same '100,000' was thrown around in the news 5 years ago. I appreciate there probably are still guns out there who are taking wildfowl with lead but not in numbers anywhere near that big.

[enfieldspares]

And how many of these fowl, inland, die from the muck and mess discharged into waterways by leisure boaters and pleasure boaters with petrol or diesel engines?

[rbrowning2]

7 minutes ago, enfieldspares said:

And how many of these fowl, inland, die from the muck and mess discharged into waterways by leisure boaters and pleasure boaters with petrol or diesel engines?

99,999 😂

[Perazzishot]

1 hour ago, Conor O'Gorman said:

Victoria Prentis (Banbury):

Lead is highly toxic and most of its uses are regulated to prevent exposure to humans and the environment. Between 50,000 and 100,000 wildfowl are estimated to die each year in the UK due to lead poisoning from spent gunshot. Lead poisoning can also have a negative effect on other wildlife, especially scavenging raptors. That is why, in England, the use of lead shot is prohibited for shooting certain species of wildfowl and for use over certain sites of special scientific interest by the Environmental Protection (Restriction on Lead Shot) (England) Regulations 1999 (as amended).

So does that mean since the lead ban 20 years ago the numbers have stayed the same? 

I think the research should be (if true) where the lead poisoning in wildfowl is coming from?

How can BASC allow statements like this to be even be submitted without serious statements of complaint?

But you will see from this the evidence that BASC are spouting is not supported by the ISSF who have submitted a great file in support on keeping lead.Maybe they should support their members like the ISSF for theirs!

 

The report below gives scientific analysis that steel shot could be worse for the environment so why are BASC pushing it?

 

ISSF-ECHA-comments.pdf

Edited July 22, 2020 by Perazzishot

[McSpredder]

1 hour ago, enfieldspares said:

 What was the evidence that BASC submitted? can we see it please?

Are you suggesting that members should be able to see what was submitted on their behalf, and get an idea how their subscriptions have been spent?

Sounds as though you would like BASC to adopt a policy of glasnost.

 

[rbrowning2]

7 minutes ago, Perazzishot said:

 

How can BASC allow statements like this to be even be submitted without serious statements of complaint?

 

Because is supports their agenda for a voluntary lead shot ban.

 

[Fuddster]

So chuck out a report, then sit back and watch the ripples and don't come back to address our comments?

Do you call this interaction on a well established shooting forum?

Been with BASC for over 20 years-my loyalty is wearing thin.

f. 

 

[Conor O'Gorman]

Read more about the estimate of between 50,000 and 100,000 wildfowl dying each year in the UK due to lead poisoning from spent gunshot on GWCT website here:

https://www.gwct.org.uk/policy/briefings/lead-ammunition/ 

The 2015 research paper is here:

http://www.oxfordleadsymposium.info/wp-content/uploads/OLS_proceedings/papers/OLS_proceedings_pain_cromie_green.pdf

In summary, from a recent article in Sporting Shooter:

The simple fact, the GWCT says, is that lead is dangerous to wildlife. When any bird or mammal ingests spent lead ammunition by mistaking it for grit or foodstuffs, or by scavenging unretrieved shot quarry, it can result in lead poisoning. In addition, animals that are shot but not killed may carry lead shot in their bodies and this adversely affects their wellbeing.

Lead ammunition degrades very slowly and so may take several decades or longer to become unavailable to foraging wildlife. Recent published estimates (2015) suggest 50,000-100,000 wildfowl die each year from lead poisoning in the UK, with between 200,000 and 400,000 thought to suffer welfare effects from ingestion or through embedded lead.

Computer modelling of bird populations and correlative studies suggest that lead poisoning may be affecting population growth rates and sizes in a number of bird species in the UK, including dabbling ducks, diving ducks and grey partridges, and in common buzzards and red kites in Europe.

Source:
https://www.sportingshooter.co.uk/features/the-science-behind-lead-toxicity-1-6655115 

 

 

[rbrowning2]

So Denmark banned lead shot in 1996 and

Would changing to non-lead ammunition reduce lead in the environment?
Yes. Data from Denmark suggest that it does reduce environmental lead. In Denmark, compliance with the ban on lead is close to 100% and wildlife exposure has reduced, benefiting the environment, the species and also the hunters.

We banned lead shot for wild fowling in 2002 and 2004 yet the same numbers are still being used ie 50 to 100k why? Has the ban not reduced exposure benefiting the environment and species, if not why not.

using old data from old reports surly is poor science.

Why did Victoria even think it was necessary to quote old data in her reply why not simply that lead shot had been banned for several years for wild fowling ............

lots of miss direction going on.

 

 

Edited July 22, 2020 by rbrowning2

[Perazzishot]

9 minutes ago, Conor O'Gorman said:

Read more about the estimate of between 50,000 and 100,000 wildfowl dying each year in the UK due to lead poisoning from spent gunshot on GWCT website here:

https://www.gwct.org.uk/policy/briefings/lead-ammunition/ 

The 2015 research paper is here:

http://www.oxfordleadsymposium.info/wp-content/uploads/OLS_proceedings/papers/OLS_proceedings_pain_cromie_green.pdf

In summary, from a recent article in Sporting Shooter:

The simple fact, the GWCT says, is that lead is dangerous to wildlife. When any bird or mammal ingests spent lead ammunition by mistaking it for grit or foodstuffs, or by scavenging unretrieved shot quarry, it can result in lead poisoning. In addition, animals that are shot but not killed may carry lead shot in their bodies and this adversely affects their wellbeing.

Lead ammunition degrades very slowly and so may take several decades or longer to become unavailable to foraging wildlife. Recent published estimates (2015) suggest 50,000-100,000 wildfowl die each year from lead poisoning in the UK, with between 200,000 and 400,000 thought to suffer welfare effects from ingestion or through embedded lead.

Computer modelling of bird populations and correlative studies suggest that lead poisoning may be affecting population growth rates and sizes in a number of bird species in the UK, including dabbling ducks, diving ducks and grey partridges, and in common buzzards and red kites in Europe.

Source:
https://www.sportingshooter.co.uk/features/the-science-behind-lead-toxicity-1-6655115 

 

 

So a biased research paper in 2015 is the cause for all this? 

Deborah J. Pain1†, Ruth Cromie1 & Rhys E. Green2,3
1 Wildfowl & Wetlands Trust, Slimbridge, Gloucester GL2 7BT, UK
2 Centre for Conservation Science, Royal Society for the Protection of Birds, The Lodge, Sandy, Bedfordshire SG19 2DL, UK3 Conservation Science Group, Department of Zoology, University of Cambridge, Downing Street, Cambridge CB2 3EJ, UK

Not backed by any proof

Broad estimates indicate that in the UK in the order of 50,000-100,000 wildfowl (c. 1.5-3.0% of the wintering population) are likely to die each winter (i.e. during the shooting season) as a direct result of lead poisoning. For migratory swans, this represents a quarter of all recorded deaths. Wildfowl that die outside of the shooting season will be additional, as will those that die of causes exacerbated by lead poisoning. 

 

Yet they also say that many thousands of game birds eat lead pellets on shooting estate. But they don't seem to die?

Estimates of mortality for terrestrial gamebirds in the UK are likely to be less accurate and precise due to fewer studies, but we estimate that about 600,000 terrestrial gamebirds are likely to have ingested gunshot at any one time and many times more throughout the shooting season. All birds that ingest lead gunshot may su er some welfare e ect, and a proportion of them, perhaps of the order of hundreds of thousands, are likely to die from lead poisoning each year.

Are you sure they are not mixing up lead poisoning and dying after being shot with lead?

 

[rbrowning2]

Even if we banned totally lead shot tomorrow they would find another stick to beat us with its all about ending blood sports killing for sport or fun. First to go will be grouse shooting, then pheasant and partridge, some pest and vermin control will be allowed by licenced individuals.

https://markavery.info/2020/07/22/press-release-ban-bloodsports-on-yorkshire-moors-2/

conor did Victoria consult BASC before writing the reply. Yes/no?

Edited July 22, 2020 by rbrowning2

[clangerman]

did any of the data generating these ridiculous numbers of dead come from wildfowlers you know the chaps actually IN the field or is it all from lab and desk jockeys 

[enfieldspares]

Quote

.....in Sporting Shooter....

Like the exchange in the 1960s in Parliament between an MP and, so it is said, the then Speaker

"But Mr Speaker I read it in XXX newspaper so it must be true."

"And I would remind the Honorable Member for XXX that I also read my horoscope in the same XXX newspaper but that doesn't make that true does it...."

I read many things in Sporting Shooter and some, to be honest, at times and in some parts, is verging near on being tommy rot.

Edited July 22, 2020 by enfieldspares

[scarecrow243]

when you ask them show me the birds that have died from lead poisoning  they dont have any because they are telling porkies

porky pig phoned daffy duck and asked him if it was all true daffy replied are you ******* nuts you stupid pig

[Old farrier]

275 dead wildfowl a day I’m sure I would have found some in the Last 40 years 

cant accept the figures there just made up