what orgs are you with

[harkom]

16 hours ago, clangerman said:

blame where it belongs full square down to basc arrogance in taking a decision that was not theirs to make sooner they are out of business the better! 

There is no room for doubt that BSAC (sic) spearheaded the drive for a lead shot ban- without prior consultation or agreement with vested interests in shooting sports. They also sold the dummy to their membership with the mantra "no credible/economic alternative - no change".

As realisation has dawned on a more widespread sector in the shooting communities, exactly how a lead ban, in whatever form it takes, will impact their respective sporting endeavours there appears to be more discontent with how matters have been handled by "the organisations, but particularly basc".

basc has held a significant captive membership through affiliation with many wild fowling clubs, and any previous rumblings of discontent amongst these groups has been stifled by the longstanding, entrenched  basc executive . Hence there was never any perceived need for change in their management structure or agenda.

May I suggest that members of basc affiliated clubs attend their club meetings and propose an alternative provider of affiliation and insurance, or if unable to attend then write a letter/send an email to the club secretary. Additionally send a copy to basc to express their concerns and displeasure with their policy and executive. 

basc membership fees are probably the highest - by a significant margin - of the field sport organisations and historically just amend subscription charges to suit their "needs".  In this current period of very marked inflationary pressures on household incomes I think that many of us will look to control outgoing expenses particularly on the non-essentials and leisure sports. There is a real justification for addressing this bone of contention and I would urge all those under the cosh of mandatory basc membership "by affiliation" to act now.

 

harkom

Edited May 3, 2022 by harkom
spelling error

[stagboy]

Seems to be some confusion about eco wads and PVA. There are several properly biodegradeable shotcups - including those made by Eley and Bioammo, to name just two, for use with nonlead shot. These wads are made with vegetable material, such as corn starch, and they break down into organic molecules which are harmless to the environment and livestock even if chewed (or even ingested).

Naturally, the manufacturers don't want to advertise the precise recipes to their competitors, as opposed to the authorities. Partly because of the commercial incentive created by the announcement of a voluntary shift by all main shooting orgs two years ago, every major cartridge manufacturer has been rushing to get newer and better bio wads into production. If they weren't, we would be completely stuffed by the inevitability of legal restrictions on lead. (Some sort of legal restrictions are coming, whether we like it or not. Sticking our heads in the sand was never a long-term  option.) 

In years to come, one might conclude that it is as well that all the main shooting orgs - supported by GWCT scientists - had the courage to grasp the nettle rather than simply appeasing a minority of shouty old leadheads and keyboard warriors with too much time on their hands, as happened in the  past when BASC suffered from a temporary spasm of weak leadership. (Apologies if that sounds offensive to anybody - but that's how many see it!)

The time these new biowads take to actually disappear physically varies widely, not least because of local conditions. But then, how long do you think fibre wads take to disappear? I have found mainly intact fibre wads on pasture long after the end of the season.  The key point about is that the constituent materials of both fibre wads and the new biodegreable shotcups are natural and, unlike synthetic plastic, and do not release toxins even if chewed by livestock. Furthermore, they breakdown in a reasonable timescale, whereas synthetic plastic takes 450 years!

I am surprised at the number of pigeon shooters who still fire single-use plastic wads out over pasture and arable crops; I wonder if the landowner knows? For organised game shooting, most estates banned plastic wads years ago - it's been in the Code of Good Shooting Practice for as long as I can recall. 

Personally , I think we need to get away from our overweening dependence on lead, because it has become increasingly clear over recent years that lead has no future. Deer stalkers are already ahead of the curve on this. Proper biowads are an important part of securing a future for live quarry shooting with shotguns. Danish hunters - who have used steel for 25 years and wouldn't want to go back to lead - are actually proposing a legal ban on plastic wads because they say there are now some good alternatives that can be used with steel.  

Edited May 3, 2022 by stagboy
typo

[Scully]

35 minutes ago, stagboy said:

Seems to be some confusion about eco wads and PVA. There are several properly biodegradeable shotcups - including those made by Eley and Bioammo, to name just two, for use with nonlead shot. These wads are made with vegetable material, such as corn starch, and they break down into organic molecules which are harmless to the environment and livestock even if chewed (or even ingested).

Naturally, the manufacturers don't want to advertise the precise recipes to their competitors, as opposed to the authorities. Partly because of the commercial incentive created by the announcement of a voluntary shift by all main shooting orgs two years ago, every major cartridge manufacturer has been rushing to get newer and better bio wads into production. If they weren't, we would be completely stuffed by the inevitability of legal restrictions on lead. (Some sort of legal restrictions are coming, whether we like it or not. Sticking our heads in the sand was never a long-term  option.) 

In years to come, one might conclude that it is as well that all the main shooting orgs - supported by GWCT scientists - had the courage to grasp the nettle rather than simply appeasing a minority of shouty old leadheads and keyboard warriors with too much time on their hands, as happened in the  past when BASC suffered from a temporary spasm of weak leadership. (Apologies if that sounds offensive to anybody - but that's how many see it!)

The time these new biowads take to actually disappear physically varies widely, not least because of local conditions. But then, how long do you think fibre wads take to disappear? I have found mainly intact fibre wads on pasture long after the end of the season.  The key point about is that the constituent materials of both fibre wads and the new biodegreable shotcups are natural and, unlike synthetic plastic, and do not release toxins even if chewed by livestock. Furthermore, they breakdown in a reasonable timescale, whereas synthetic plastic takes 450 years!

I am surprised at the number of pigeon shooters who still fire single-use plastic wads out over pasture and arable crops; I wonder if the landowner knows? For organised game shooting, most estates banned plastic wads years ago - it's been in the Code of Good Shooting Practice for as long as I can recall. 

Personally , I think we need to get away from our overweening dependence on lead, because it has become increasingly clear over recent years that lead has no future. Deer stalkers are already ahead of the curve on this. Proper biowads are an important part of securing a future for live quarry shooting with shotguns. Danish hunters - who have used steel for 25 years and wouldn't want to go back to lead - are actually proposing a legal ban on plastic wads because they say there are now some good alternatives that can be used with steel.  

Excellent post! 👍

[wymberley]

25 minutes ago, stagboy said:

Seems to be some confusion about eco wads and PVA. There are several properly biodegradeable shotcups - including those made by Eley and Bioammo, to name just two, for use with nonlead shot. These wads are made with vegetable material, such as corn starch, and they break down into organic molecules which are harmless to the environment and livestock even if chewed (or even ingested).

Naturally, the manufacturers don't want to advertise the precise recipes to their competitors, as opposed to the authorities. Partly because of the commercial incentive created by the announcement of a voluntary shift by all main shooting orgs two years ago, every major cartridge manufacturer has been rushing to get newer and better bio wads into production. If they weren't, we would stand to be stuffed by the inevitability of legal restrictions on lead.

In years to come, one might conclude that it is as well that all the main shooting orgs - supported by GWCT scientists - had the courage to grasp the nettle rather than simply appeasing a minority of shouty old leadheads and keyboard warriors with too much time on their hands, as happened in the  past when BASC suffered from a temporary spasm of weak leadership. (Apologies if that sounds offensive to anybody - but that's how many see it!)

The time these new biowads take to actually disappear physically varies widely, not least because of local conditions. But then, how long do you think fibre wads take to disappear? I have found mainly intact fibre wads on pasture long after the end of the season.  The key point about is that the constituent materials of both fibre wads and the new biodegreable shotcups are natural and, unlike synthetic plastic, and do not release toxins even if chewed by livestock. Furthermore, they breakdown in a reasonable timescale, whereas synthetic plastic takes 450 years!

I am surprised at the number of pigeon shooters who still fire single-use plastic wads out over pasture and arable crops; I wonder if the landowner knows? For organised game shooting, most estates banned plastic wads years ago - it's been in the Code of Good Shooting Practice for as long as I can recall. 

Personally , I think we need to get away from our overweening dependence on lead, because it has become increasingly clear over recent years that lead has no future. Proper biowads are an important part of securing a future for live quarry shooting. Danish hunters - who have used steel for 25 years and wouldn't want to go back to lead - are actually proposing a legal ban on plastic wads because they say there are now some good alternatives that can be used with steel.  

So, we retirees are now classed as a typo, are we? I do think that we've earned the right to be permitted an opinion after all that would be the case as many would see it. To help me arrive at one (opinion), I would like to know the reason for the term, 'nonlead', when the original one, 'non toxic', better defined the objective. Someone has been playing with words unnecessarily (too much time on their hands perhaps), but this  term could well disguise the fact that anything nonlead could well turn out to be not as non toxic as we were lead  (see, can't get away from it ) to believe. Non Toxic broaches no argument.

[holloway]

17 hours ago, Jim Neal said:

WHAT "situation" before BASC led most of the other orgs into shafting us all?  There was no "situation".  BASC's very reassuring "No evidence, no change" stance was the thing that kept the status quo.  There is STILL absolutely zero evidence of lead being harmful, either as spent shot in the environment or residing in the carcasses of shot game.  Even the historical evidence collected over wetlands makes sketchy reading to me, it seems like the work of people who are looking to find a problem rather than monitor a situation.

Ignorance is bliss.  You'd better sit down because I've got some bad news for you.

"Eco wads", as they are very incorrectly described, are not environmentally friendly in the slightest.  They are made from Polyvinyl Acetate, which is a plastic, would you believe?!  PVA requires specific enzymes to be present in order for it to be biodegradable.  Randomly discarded into the environment without those enzymes present, PVA will only slowly dissolve rather than biodegrade.  That means it has simply been turned into something described by a very popular buzz term of late: microplastics.  Microplastics are impossible to eliminate from the ecosystem once they are introduced.

These "eco wads" are simply a case of "Out of sight, out of mind".  The problem has NOT been solved, it has been HIDDEN and is just as bad as, if not worse than, spent lead shot in the environment.

Industrial production of PVA is no more friendly to the environment than any other plastic.

Stock can still choke on a freshly spent PVA wad before it has had time to soften.

Forget shooting steel anywhere near trees managed for forestry.

Suitable?!!  Jog on......

Read Stagboys next post he says it all so much better than I can .

And as a bonus he clearly knows what he’s talking about.

[holloway]

4 hours ago, stagboy said:

Seems to be some confusion about eco wads and PVA. There are several properly biodegradeable shotcups - including those made by Eley and Bioammo, to name just two, for use with nonlead shot. These wads are made with vegetable material, such as corn starch, and they break down into organic molecules which are harmless to the environment and livestock even if chewed (or even ingested).

Naturally, the manufacturers don't want to advertise the precise recipes to their competitors, as opposed to the authorities. Partly because of the commercial incentive created by the announcement of a voluntary shift by all main shooting orgs two years ago, every major cartridge manufacturer has been rushing to get newer and better bio wads into production. If they weren't, we would be completely stuffed by the inevitability of legal restrictions on lead. (Some sort of legal restrictions are coming, whether we like it or not. Sticking our heads in the sand was never a long-term  option.) 

In years to come, one might conclude that it is as well that all the main shooting orgs - supported by GWCT scientists - had the courage to grasp the nettle rather than simply appeasing a minority of shouty old leadheads and keyboard warriors with too much time on their hands, as happened in the  past when BASC suffered from a temporary spasm of weak leadership. (Apologies if that sounds offensive to anybody - but that's how many see it!)

The time these new biowads take to actually disappear physically varies widely, not least because of local conditions. But then, how long do you think fibre wads take to disappear? I have found mainly intact fibre wads on pasture long after the end of the season.  The key point about is that the constituent materials of both fibre wads and the new biodegreable shotcups are natural and, unlike synthetic plastic, and do not release toxins even if chewed by livestock. Furthermore, they breakdown in a reasonable timescale, whereas synthetic plastic takes 450 years!

I am surprised at the number of pigeon shooters who still fire single-use plastic wads out over pasture and arable crops; I wonder if the landowner knows? For organised game shooting, most estates banned plastic wads years ago - it's been in the Code of Good Shooting Practice for as long as I can recall. 

Personally , I think we need to get away from our overweening dependence on lead, because it has become increasingly clear over recent years that lead has no future. Deer stalkers are already ahead of the curve on this. Proper biowads are an important part of securing a future for live quarry shooting with shotguns. Danish hunters - who have used steel for 25 years and wouldn't want to go back to lead - are actually proposing a legal ban on plastic wads because they say there are now some good alternatives that can be used with steel.  

Excellent post ,I an astounded by some of the garbage posted on this subject by people who clearly have no idea about eco wads ,thankyou for explaining it to them so much better than I could . .

[oowee]

6 hours ago, harkom said:

There is no room for doubt that BSAC (sic) spearheaded the drive for a lead shot ban- without prior consultation or agreement with vested interests in shooting sports. They also sold the dummy to their membership with the mantra "no credible/economic alternative - no change".

As realisation has dawned on a more widespread sector in the shooting communities, exactly how a lead ban, in whatever form it takes, will impact their respective sporting endeavours there appears to be more discontent with how matters have been handled by "the organisations, but particularly basc".

basc has held a significant captive membership through affiliation with many wild fowling clubs, and any previous rumblings of discontent amongst these groups has been stifled by the longstanding, entrenched  basc executive . Hence there was never any perceived need for change in their management structure or agenda.

May I suggest that members of basc affiliated clubs attend their club meetings and propose an alternative provider of affiliation and insurance, or if unable to attend then write a letter/send an email to the club secretary. Additionally send a copy to basc to express their concerns and displeasure with their policy and executive. 

basc membership fees are probably the highest - by a significant margin - of the field sport organisations and historically just amend subscription charges to suit their "needs".  In this current period of very marked inflationary pressures on household incomes I think that many of us will look to control outgoing expenses particularly on the non-essentials and leisure sports. There is a real justification for addressing this bone of contention and I would urge all those under the cosh of mandatory basc membership "by affiliation" to act now.

 

harkom

Personally I support the work that BASC is doing in its efforts to position shooting as, less of a marginal activity and more of an acceptable pastime carried out by a relatively small proportion of the population. Such a huge task can only be attempted with significant resources. The £70 / £80 i pay is small change compared to the cost of participation in the sport itself. 

I have found the support offered by BASC on firearms legislation issues alone worth the cost of membership. Rather than moan about the role BASC has taken on lead I would implore them to go further and start work on the plastic shell cases that we still use. 

That said I would have expected BASC to reflect the difficulties faced by the nation during the covid pandemic and allow at the very least a reduced membership cost for a period. I also feel that the retained reserves should be capped or a reasoned argument be put forward as to why should large reserves are required.

[wymberley]

22 hours ago, London Best said:

I think what our friend meant was that anyone to whom shooting was a way of life did not need to partake in anything so degrading as work. 
In other words, they could afford not to have to work.

Yes and a belated thank you.

A way of life is defined as a typical pattern of behaviour of a person or group. A rural way of life along with farm work could include a country vet, dominoes in the pub and shooting, but each would only be a part of the overall, and none predominant. A shooting way of life is not consistent with being at the beck and call of an employer for some 8 to 10 hours a day for 5 to 6 days a week - unless, naturally, the work was shooting associated.

Edited May 3, 2022 by wymberley

[8 shot]

8 hours ago, stagboy said:

Danish hunters - who have used steel for 25 years and wouldn't want to go back to lead

They definittely use Lead and some use plastic wads when shooting pigeons over here,as do most if not all foriegn shooters

[8 shot]

2 hours ago, oowee said:

That said I would have expected BASC to reflect the difficulties faced by the nation during the covid pandemic and allow at the very least a reduced membership cost for a period.

Have you not noticed the price of game shooting, the Executive committee will still need 3 days a week through the season to spread the "non lead" agenda.

 

2 hours ago, oowee said:

I have found the support offered by BASC on firearms legislation issues alone worth the cost of membership.

Yep they managed to keep the GP's letters just below a 100 bucks a signature or use one of there own reccomended companies

[Smudger687]

21 hours ago, stagboy said:

The time these new biowads take to actually disappear physically varies widely, not least because of local conditions. But then, how long do you think fibre wads take to disappear? I have found mainly intact fibre wads on pasture long after the end of the season.  The key point about is that the constituent materials of both fibre wads and the new biodegreable shotcups are natural and, unlike synthetic plastic, and do not release toxins even if chewed by livestock. Furthermore, they breakdown in a reasonable timescale, whereas synthetic plastic takes 450 years!

If you cut open a fibre wad cartridge you'll likely find a thin layer of plastic on both sides to stop the shot embedding itself into the wad upon firing. I believe that fibre wads are also frequently impregnated with bitumen, and bitumen is absolutely full of carcinogens. These will be released into the surrounding environment as the wad breaks down. 

In my opinion, fibres are no better than plastic wads. At least plastic wads are more visible than fibres, and thus are more easily recoverable after a day's shooting. 

[wymberley]

19 minutes ago, Smudger687 said:

If you cut open a fibre wad cartridge you'll likely find a thin layer of plastic on both sides to stop the shot embedding itself into the wad upon firing. I believe that fibre wads are also frequently impregnated with bitumen, and bitumen is absolutely full of carcinogens. These will be released into the surrounding environment as the wad breaks down. 

In my opinion, fibres are no better than plastic wads. At least plastic wads are more visible than fibres, and thus are more easily recoverable after a day's shooting. 

Flippin' 'eck, it just gets worse - one thing after another. It's a wonder many of us are still here. On top of everything else - lead soldiers, lead paint, asbestos and now bitumen is added to the deadly list. 70 odd years ago we used to use this as chewing gum.

[Scully]

I don’t know of any farmer or landowner who has ever had a beast of any kind choke or even knowingly eat a wad, fibre or plastic. 🤷‍♂️

[TIGHTCHOKE]

11 minutes ago, Scully said:

I don’t know of any farmer or landowner who has ever had a beast of any kind choke or even knowingly eat a wad, fibre or plastic. 🤷‍♂️

Please stop being so sensible Scully!

We have been told by BASC and most of our Associations that lead must go, but without a similar priced and similarly effective alternative.

Personally I would rather have been consulted and would have jumped on the "anti plastic" bandwagon and got rid of plastic wads, before deciding lead had to go.

Meanwhile back in the REAL world, I will continue shooting, hoping that BASC and our Associations get their act together and protect their Memberships that actually pay them to do just that.

[Fellside]

27 minutes ago, Smudger687 said:

If you cut open a fibre wad cartridge you'll likely find a thin layer of plastic on both sides to stop the shot embedding itself into the wad upon firing. I believe that fibre wads are also frequently impregnated with bitumen, and bitumen is absolutely full of carcinogens. These will be released into the surrounding environment as the wad breaks down. 

In my opinion, fibres are no better than plastic wads. At least plastic wads are more visible than fibres, and thus are more easily recoverable after a day's shooting. 

To be honest, it’s hard to find all the fired plastic wads after shooting. I used plastic wads on a pigeon decoying afternoon last year, the result a shopping failure……well, OK, poor preparation. It wasn’t a busy day - I fired roughly 60 cart’s. Feeling very guilty about the plastic litter, I paced about in the stubble till it was nearly dark, but only found less than half the wads. 

[udderlyoffroad]

4 hours ago, Smudger687 said:

I believe that fibre wads are also frequently impregnated with bitumen, and bitumen is absolutely full of carcinogens

Do you have *any* sources you could cite to back up this “belief”? 

 

[8 shot]

5 hours ago, Scully said:

I don’t know of any farmer or landowner who has ever had a beast of any kind choke or even knowingly eat a wad, fibre or plastic. 🤷‍♂️

I don’t know of anyone that’s died of lead poisoning from eating game ! But here we are. 😉

[Scully]

4 hours ago, TIGHTCHOKE said:

Please stop being so sensible Scully!

We have been told by BASC and most of our Associations that lead must go, but without a similar priced and similarly effective alternative.

Personally I would rather have been consulted and would have jumped on the "anti plastic" bandwagon and got rid of plastic wads, before deciding lead had to go.

Meanwhile back in the REAL world, I will continue shooting, hoping that BASC and our Associations get their act together and protect their Memberships that actually pay them to do just that.

This is how I see it.....

There was a time when shooters just got on with shooting, on the whole without interference, and this is really just how shooters would still like it to be; they just want to be able to go out and shoot without any bother from anyone, and that's fair enough; I feel exactly the same way.

However times change ( if you need evidence then consider that not too long ago hunting foxes was legal but homosexuality wasn't ) and shooting, like much else in our day to day lives in this so called enlightened society, has become politicised. 

I never wanted to become involved in the politics of shooting, I just wanted to go out and shoot, but outside influences have determined that if I want to keep my way of life then I need to become involved. 

We all know the facts regarding lead.  We all know it's a toxic substance. We all know there aren't thousands of ducks and geese washing up on the beaches and river bankings due to ingesting lead shot, and we all know that no one has died as a result of eating lead shot game. It's not too long ago the HSE itself stated that as part of a healthy balanced diet the risks of eating lead shot game were negligible. We all also know that there are outside influences at play here, mostly ( but not all ) concerning business and big money. 

BASC, NGO, CLA, Moorland Association, GWCT etc etc etc are in business; it's not sport and it's not a hobby, they're in business and they want to survive. They have chosen to back big business because that's where the money and their best chance of survival comes from. I don't blame them for that at all, but I do blame them for the way they went about breaking the news to their membership. It was abysmal! If this is typical of management people skills ( and it would seem it is ) then it is no surprise that members leave and factions of their organisation also leave to form their own organisations. It could have been handled so much better with a little forethought and planning. Anyhow, its done now. 

Lead isn't going because it's toxic ( otherwise clay shooting would be affected also ) but because of politics and the agendas which have a greater influence on politics than does that of shooting. I don't like it anymore than anyone else, but that's the way it is.

Our shooting organisations can't fight this anymore than the rest of us, and to blame them is just plain silly really. It's bigger than our shooting organisations, it's politics, and they are caught between a rock and a hard place; knowing that they have no influence over this matter whatsoever, but trying to placate and keep onside its membership. It's just a pity they're ineffective at either. 

We can either accept that change is coming and make the best of it, or we can......what? 

 

[TIGHTCHOKE]

Which BIG businesses, Game Shooting?

[Scully]

14 minutes ago, TIGHTCHOKE said:

Which BIG businesses, Game Shooting?

British shooting industry as a whole I suppose, but yes, commercial game shooting is a big business. 🤷‍♂️

Edited May 4, 2022 by Scully

[Scully]

43 minutes ago, 8 shot said:

I don’t know of anyone that’s died of lead poisoning from eating game ! But here we are. 😉

Correct. 👍

The point I was trying to make is that wads aren’t potentially toxic to anything which may ingest them in the same way that lead can be. Unsightly yes, potentially dangerous, no. 

[London Best]

Scully, I think you are wrong about clay shooting not being affected.

[8 shot]

38 minutes ago, Scully said:

Correct. 👍

The point I was trying to make is that wads aren’t potentially toxic to anything which may ingest them in the same way that lead can be. Unsightly yes, potentially dangerous, no. 

There is a very high chance it could get raked in to the sward before the forager or baler pick it up which is why we only use fibre wads. 

[Scully]

3 minutes ago, 8 shot said:

There is a very high chance it could get raked in to the sward before the forager or baler pick it up which is why we only use fibre wads. 

Like I said, it’s of no concern to any of the farmers I know. 🤷‍♂️

14 minutes ago, London Best said:

Scully, I think you are wrong about clay shooting not being affected.

Possibly. As far as I’m aware lead loads for competition aren’t being phased out, plus there is talk of exemptions where lead shot can be collected, so who knows? 

[mellors]

All outdoor uses of lead ammunition are covered by the review. That includes lead ammunition for live quarry and target shooting, i.e. airguns, pistols, shotguns, rifles and historic firearms.

Well that's from the latest basc update received today. 

Looks to me like it's a done deal possibly with some minor damage limitation.