Have your say on complete lead ammunition ban

[Conor O'Gorman]

 

BASC recently helped defeat a Labour-backed proposal to ban lead shot for live quarry shooting on 1 January 2023. The vehicle for this was an amendment to the Environment Bill and after a debate in the House of Commons this was voted down.

Meanwhile, the EU has approved further lead shot restrictions in and around wetlands that take effect in 2023 which could severely impact shooting in the UK if the government is forced to adopt the new laws as part of a Brexit deal.

Moves are now afoot by the European Commission for a total ban on all lead ammunition across Europe. Despite Brexit, whatever the EU does will influence UK policy discussions and the European Federation for Hunting and Conservation (FACE) needs your help with a short anonymous survey to evidence the possible socio-economic impacts in the UK.

To have your say please visit www.face.eu/survey

[Newbie to this]

7 minutes ago, Conor O'Gorman said:

www.face.eu/survey

https://www.face.eu/2020/12/hunters-survey-on-lead/

 

[mellors]

What will that achieve. 

Our orgs basc etc have already agreed to phasing lead out in 5 years so it's going anyway. 

[rbrowning2]

31 minutes ago, mellors said:

What will that achieve. 

Our orgs basc etc have already agreed to phasing lead out in 5 years so it's going anyway. 

The orgs basc phasing out is only voluntary, this would be law and impact on all lead so unable to continue to use lead in clay pigeon shooting. However Connor you are sending out very mixed messages are you not? 
but realistically how could you ban lead for live quarry and not clay pigeon shooting? And enforce that.
Also if their is no market for game shot with lead then you either don’t use lead or don’t shoot the game.

At least the EU are so far not putting the additional hurdle in of only using biodegradable wads.

it would also impact on rifle ammunition.

 

[mellors]

6 minutes ago, rbrowning2 said:

The orgs basc phasing out is only voluntary, this would be law and impact on all lead so unable to continue to use lead in clay pigeon shooting. However Connor you are sending out very mixed messages are you not? 
but realistically how could you ban lead for live quarry and not clay pigeon shooting? And enforce that.
Also if their is no market for game shot with lead then you either don’t use lead or don’t shoot the game.

At least the EU are so far not putting the additional hurdle in of only using biodegradable wads.

it would also impact on rifle ammunition.

 

Voluntarily or not it's now expected to happen. How far they go and how soon is immaterial. 

[Rob85]

Friend of mine tried the non toxic air rifle ammunition, said it reduced the range to where you may as well throw a stone at a rabbit. Same goes for .22lr, it reduced practical accuracy to the point where you may as well use an air gun, added to that the hollow points don't generate enough velocity to mushroom properly.

I just hope britain gathers up enough balls to tell the EU to do one over these ridiculous rules. In my opinion all this is going to do is line more people up in opposition to the EU, and look what happens when the French get annoyed at their own government... on that note what happened to the French? What happened to viva la republic? Viva la EU masters doesn't have the same ring to it.

[wymberley]

What will it achieve? The answer is that that is unknown. If the survey is not submitted then the guaranteed anwer is zero. The greater the input the more likely it is to be considered. One teeny weeny little problem is that for some unfathomable reason vermin control and where-ever it may occur has no mention. Can we take it that the lead ban only affects game? You can bet your bottom dollar that it does not. This aspect needs sorting and in the words of the survey - "Strongly agree".

[TRINITY]

4 hours ago, rbrowning2 said:

The orgs basc phasing out is only voluntary, this would be law and impact on all lead so unable to continue to use lead in clay pigeon shooting. However Connor you are sending out very mixed messages are you not? 
but realistically how could you ban lead for live quarry and not clay pigeon shooting? And enforce that.
Also if their is no market for game shot with lead then you either don’t use lead or don’t shoot the game.

At least the EU are so far not putting the additional hurdle in of only using biodegradable wads.

it would also impact on rifle ammunition.

 

I would have thought non bio degradable wads have the same  impact on the environment as lead. Cant see the logic of banning one and not the other .

However it is the EU after all . 

[mudpatten]

I`ve tried to fill in the survey but cannot get past the question about waterfowl hunting.

[wymberley]

3 minutes ago, mudpatten said:

I`ve tried to fill in the survey but cannot get past the question about waterfowl hunting.

Of no help at all I admit, but all was OK when I did it earlier.

[grahamch]

Yet another reason not to vote labour, green etc.#

[The Mighty Prawn]

5 hours ago, mudpatten said:

I`ve tried to fill in the survey but cannot get past the question about waterfowl hunting.

Me too, waste of time

[rbrowning2]

17 hours ago, The Mighty Prawn said:

Me too, waste of time

Me three tried three times have now given up.

[clangerman]

i didn’t even try to fill it in basc and co wanted a lead ban this is a lead ban job done be careful what you wish for you might just get it 

[Terry2016]

BASC & Co opened for a 5 year transition away form lead & single use plastics for All love quarry. 

The EU ban that could be relevant to us in the UK as we adopt much of this legislation is making for an outright ban by the end of 2021 

It also makes it a criminal offence to have lead on your person near a wetland, a wetland is not defined so could be a puddle of water.  

[Scully]

It states the survey will not work with mobile phones. 

[figgy]

So if I'm right basc decided on a voluntary phasing out of lead amunition as it would have been forced upon us. 

Where's the difference if voluntary or law, your still not using it. 

Now basc want help stopping a EU law on banning lead amunition. 

Is it just me that think this is madness on the part of our shooting orgs. 

Should never have proposed a voluntary ban in the first place.

The old adage be careful what you wish for springs to mind.

But playing devil's advocate with modern copper bullets doing the business and steel shot being used for fowling where let's face it lead was always more humane.  What's the problem? 

 

Basc are great at posting on here if late then never following up answering questions. 

At least when David BASC posted he would answer and try to help. 

Posting a useless survey you can't fill in says it all. 😤 

Come of Connor get it sorted.

Edited December 21, 2020 by figgy

[stevieknuckles]

I don’t normally voice my opinions out loud as there is a tendency to get shouted down, however with the question with regards to lead shot I do feel we are taking a step back. Throughout history the development of weapons/ firearms has always been for more efficient lethality that is why we use lead. By adopting steel or copper we are taking a step back and neglecting our first duty of insuring the most human dispatch of the quarry due to inferior kinetic energy being transferred. 
I’ve  read some of the findings on lead and the environment and I know it’s toxic, however the lead used in shot is in a very stable state due to its manufacturing this is why we have been able to ingest it for years, carry it around in our bodies as shrapnel without any perceived ill effects.

The Norwegians have reinstated the use of lead for various hunting scenarios because it was the best most human option, they are a very level headed and well informed nation and would not take this step lightly. 
The London shooting ground was tested for the effects of lead on its grounds and surrounding area, this club has been shot over heavily for over a hundred years the findings were negligible. 
I really don’t see a problem with if you are wanting to sell game for the food chain yes use steel or whatever alternative there is out there. But if you are controlling vermin or shooting something for the pot and want the cleanest kill possible carry on using lead until TSS becomes a viable option for the masses this is the only alternative I see to lead as it looks like a massive step forward in performance. 
A question I have is how useable is a pigeon/ Partridge/ Pheasant carcass that has been shot at 30 yards with 32 grams of no 3 or 4 steel shot? The shot size is large for a smallish quarry and the payload heavy how does the meat damage compare? I’ve seen birds shot with similar payloads in lead and it makes a right mess. We are being pushed into a scenario by the big commercial shoots because they struggle to get rid of their birds, if the shoot you go on can’t use the birds it kills between the guns and beaters how do you morally justify your actions? Again if your moving it on yes use steel it’s not difficult to enforce these rules on shoot days.

The more I hear on this subject the more I see us rolling over and selling ourselves out, most of the shooters I know don’t go on big bag days and genuinely shoot what they use for themselves and I expect that is true for most shooters. However the policies are being driven by the organisations who are looking after the commercial shoots. As usual the masses are being over looked for the few before we know it we will be using inferior shot and losing a lot of our smaller calibers .17 hmr, 22 lr, 9 mm garden gun, .410, because there is no commercially viable option. The .22 lr has been pretty much unchanged for over a hundred years for good reason it works and it’s cheap.

I guess I’m just trying to say this doesn’t feel like progress to me, in this day and age of sustainability, organic food, growing numbers of people wanting to reconnect with food, to my mind our biggest reason and defence for shooting is that we are shooting for our own consumption you are taking responsibility for your actions and not hiding from the fact that an animal has died unlike most people who have never killed something to eat. We will always have an impact on our environment even if it is just by our numbers, the shooting community is a very small percentage of the population and compared to the damage done by us a nation, fly tipping, rubbish thrown from car windows, fast food wrappers, dog pooh bags look at any lay by/ car park, dog walkers going where they want, scrotes joy riding cars and scooters then leaving them burnt out. I don’t think we as a small community have much to feel guilty about.

[ClemFandango]

Personally I'd accept an all out ban on lead. 

I already shoot non-lead in my big rifle

I use Steel and Tungsten in my shotguns

and I use tin pellets in my airgun.

I've yet to find a good alternative for the .22lr. I'll be sad to lose it but it will be worth it if all of the ******** posted on here and other forums stops. 

by and large the non-lead alternatives work and are viable. People are just too pig headed to accept them. 

If people start using them my hope is that they will actually realise that it's not as bad as they have been told or convinced themselves and maybe the total ******** spouted in the non-lead threads on internet forums will be reduced. 

That said. There is also reams and reams of ******** on lead ammo so maybe that's unlikely. 

Also BASC will have to stop grandstanding about it. Claiming victories that aren't theirs and generally taking the **** out of their members. 

Edited December 24, 2020 by ClemFandango

[Scully]

3 hours ago, stevieknuckles said:

I don’t normally voice my opinions out loud as there is a tendency to get shouted down, however with the question with regards to lead shot I do feel we are taking a step back. Throughout history the development of weapons/ firearms has always been for more efficient lethality that is why we use lead. By adopting steel or copper we are taking a step back and neglecting our first duty of insuring the most human dispatch of the quarry due to inferior kinetic energy being transferred. 
I’ve  read some of the findings on lead and the environment and I know it’s toxic, however the lead used in shot is in a very stable state due to its manufacturing this is why we have been able to ingest it for years, carry it around in our bodies as shrapnel without any perceived ill effects.

The Norwegians have reinstated the use of lead for various hunting scenarios because it was the best most human option, they are a very level headed and well informed nation and would not take this step lightly. 
The London shooting ground was tested for the effects of lead on its grounds and surrounding area, this club has been shot over heavily for over a hundred years the findings were negligible. 
I really don’t see a problem with if you are wanting to sell game for the food chain yes use steel or whatever alternative there is out there. But if you are controlling vermin or shooting something for the pot and want the cleanest kill possible carry on using lead until TSS becomes a viable option for the masses this is the only alternative I see to lead as it looks like a massive step forward in performance. 
A question I have is how useable is a pigeon/ Partridge/ Pheasant carcass that has been shot at 30 yards with 32 grams of no 3 or 4 steel shot? The shot size is large for a smallish quarry and the payload heavy how does the meat damage compare? I’ve seen birds shot with similar payloads in lead and it makes a right mess. We are being pushed into a scenario by the big commercial shoots because they struggle to get rid of their birds, if the shoot you go on can’t use the birds it kills between the guns and beaters how do you morally justify your actions? Again if your moving it on yes use steel it’s not difficult to enforce these rules on shoot days.

The more I hear on this subject the more I see us rolling over and selling ourselves out, most of the shooters I know don’t go on big bag days and genuinely shoot what they use for themselves and I expect that is true for most shooters. However the policies are being driven by the organisations who are looking after the commercial shoots. As usual the masses are being over looked for the few before we know it we will be using inferior shot and losing a lot of our smaller calibers .17 hmr, 22 lr, 9 mm garden gun, .410, because there is no commercially viable option. The .22 lr has been pretty much unchanged for over a hundred years for good reason it works and it’s cheap.

I guess I’m just trying to say this doesn’t feel like progress to me, in this day and age of sustainability, organic food, growing numbers of people wanting to reconnect with food, to my mind our biggest reason and defence for shooting is that we are shooting for our own consumption you are taking responsibility for your actions and not hiding from the fact that an animal has died unlike most people who have never killed something to eat. We will always have an impact on our environment even if it is just by our numbers, the shooting community is a very small percentage of the population and compared to the damage done by us a nation, fly tipping, rubbish thrown from car windows, fast food wrappers, dog pooh bags look at any lay by/ car park, dog walkers going where they want, scrotes joy riding cars and scooters then leaving them burnt out. I don’t think we as a small community have much to feel guilty about.

Lead is going, get used to it. Harping on about its humane properties as opposed to its substitutes is both futile and illogical. 
Criticising commercial shooting won’t save lead either, nor indeed shooting. 
Think through logically all that you’ve mentioned in an attempt to justify lead shot. 

Edited December 24, 2020 by Scully

[wymberley]

Very well posted indeed. It is sad that your opening sentence has proven to be correct. I may, or may not, agree with everything that you've said and should it be the latter, then this does not and cannot detract from a well considered opinion.

What is going to abolish the use of lead to a greater or lesser degree - if not totally -  is the same things that have ultimately held sway in any similar situation irrespective of its specific topic/cause.

[stevieknuckles]

Thank you for some interesting views, I think my main point is that the only option that I’ve seen that is a positive step forward in lethality is TSS unfortunately this is out of most peoples price range. Every other option is a poor substitute so far as I can see it, yes they work with higher velocity/ pressures/ pay loads admittedly I’ve only used steel shot a few times and didn’t get on with it so now choose to not shoot ducks etc

I guess I am also tired of the hype and feelings that this subject drags up and the bluntness that it can bring out in some people hence my first comment. 

[steve s×s]

Well, I've read the posts and yes we can do none toxic but as has been said before some of the people behind this ban don't give a  dam about environmental issues, there only concern is to stop field sports, so if and when the lead as gone what next, maybe we should protest, demonstrate, make a complete nuisance, oh wait a minute we can't because we're law abiding gun owners so can't speak out or else 🤫

[243deer]

Evidence on using lead from New Zealand and Norway is being ignored by the main shooting organisations including BASC, the NGO and GWCT despite their somewhat dishonest claims that they are evidence based. Connor and Terry you both have an agenda to try and help large number driven game shoots survive which I understand because it benefits shooting in general and I certainly do not want to see all the woodland designed for shooting disappear for either intensive arable nor housing use. However chucking .410 pest controllers under a bus because it suits you is not acceptable. The arguments being presented to our politicians are not balanced and not evidence based by the shooting organisations. My mrs recently did a survey of ASDA, Tescos and Sainsburys in Swaffham and not one game bird was for sale. Regardless of what it was shot with I cannot see a miraculous change in the British housewife resulting in sudden game use and that is in one of the foremost game producing areas of the country.

I personally have processed nearly 200 game birds this season for mine and friends use, birds that were free because they were not wanted by large number shoots. 

I have no problem with non-lead (everything is toxic to some extent hence I did not use the phrase non-toxic) shot for game going into the human food chain but why have you even suggested the ban on lead for vermin in .410's or not suggested an exclusion as New Zealand has?

[Jim Neal]