HSE final lead ammunition consultation launched

[Conor O'Gorman]

21 minutes ago, udderlyoffroad said:

Thanks Conor.

I think the point is, the HSE proposed ban makes no mention of plastic wads.

Presumably, the Danes have been busy littering their countryside with plastic wads since '87?   Further to the Northwest, the Norwegians have 'unbanned' lead as the lesser of two evils.

Surely the fact the technology for biodegradable wads is not there yet, along with supply chain issues* means that a lead ban is undesirable at this point?  Got to be worth pointing out the HSE...

*Hell, we could even blame Brexit, it cops the blame for everything else after all...

 

Yes, in Denmark they have researched the issue with plastic wads - two articles in links below.

Plastic litter from shotgun ammunition in marine ecosystems (2021)
https://www.preprints.org/manuscript/202105.0218/v1/download 

Plastic litter from shotgun ammunition on Danish coastlines - amounts and provenance (2018)
https://strandoghavjagt.dk/forum/attachment/1385

The HSE has taken into account plastic wads in its latest consultation docs and I think we will be cross-referencing that in our response in relation to the voluntary transition away from lead shot and single-use plastics - but will double-check in any case.

As regards Brexit - that is why the HSE was tasked with reviewing lead in ammunition and many many other substances. That said, without Brexit we would be amidst the EU lead ban proposals currently being finalised.

[Conor O'Gorman]

On 05/11/2023 at 12:13, Rewulf said:

It's also interesting how, within 1 month of the announcement, the HSE put forward it's proposals and consultation plans, upon asking if BASC et al had any idea this was coming, they stated categorically they did not. 

It's my belief there was collusion in some way, obviously it can never be proven, but it calls into question the aims and trustworthiness of our shooting orgs. 

Let's try again shall we, given that twice now you have avoided acknowledging your mistake. Do you accept that you made an error in posting the above? For clarity, the announcement you refer to is, I presume, the one made by nine organisations in February 2020? The UK government announced in March 2021 that it was tasking HSE to review lead in ammunition. Therefore you are wrong and so is your conspiracy. 

[Rewulf]

14 minutes ago, Conor O'Gorman said:

Let's try again shall we, given that twice now you have avoided acknowledging your mistake. Do you accept that you made an error in posting the above? For clarity, the announcement you refer to is, I presume, the one made by nine organisations in February 2020? The UK government announced in March 2021 that it was tasking HSE to review lead in ammunition. Therefore you are wrong and so is your conspiracy. 

Yes Conor , I will put my hands up and admit I was a year out.
At least I can do that, as I seem to remember the 'Do you trust BASC' thread, where, for at least 10 pages you ducked and dived about the finances of the BASC fighting fund, telling everyone that it was clear to see where the money had gone, only to eventually admit that information was NOT, and still is NOT, for public or membership consumption, and this admission had to be literally dragged out of you.
Lets talk about the insults against me and others, we were anti shooting trolls for asking the question, as you repeatedly stated the question has been answered, when it clearly hadnt, and was never going to be.
So, if youre after an apology from me , I would expect one from you, for that clear and obvious error and attempt at misdirection ?
Im not holding my breath, as BASC has never admitted it was wrong on any of its many strategy errors.

My 'conspiracy' was that you had inside information that the HSE/DEFRA were going to attempt a lead ammunition ban.
If you didnt know it was coming, why did BASC put forward the 'phase out' ?
If you 'did know' that the EU was already putting forward plans to outlaw lead across the board, why did you just do the phase out for live quarry, and not clay shooting and other sports ?

If you truly believed that this day would come when all aspects of shooting would have to do without  lead projectiles, then why didnt BASC and the other shooting organisations do a large membership poll on how they wanted to play it ?
With the full support of membership, which you clearly dont have, would that not have been a stronger position to lobby with, because at the moment , most of us feel like BASC and the other orgs who signed up to the phase out, have, quite frankly , sold us out to protect their own interests... When those interests should be , first and foremost, the members who pay your wages.

[Rewulf]

I thought I would put this out there for clarity , a conversation I had with Conor on this very subject 9 months ago.

 

  On 28/02/2023 at 16:30, Conor O'Gorman said:

@Rewulf sorry, I thought I had answered your question, and to be exact about it - we had no prior knowledge of the Defra announcement of a lead ammunition review on 23 March 2021.

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/plans-announced-to-phase-out-lead-ammunition-in-bid-to-protect-wildlife

Thank you Conor, I will of course take you on your word, but dont you find statements like this....

'Shooting organisations are also supportive of transitioning away from the use of lead ammunition and are working with government to bring this about.'

 ... Some what troubling ?
It doesnt say lead 'shot' , it says lead ammunition.

I also find it a little err, convenient , that BASC et al , announce their 'voluntary phase out' in Feb 2020, and little over a year later the government announce an inquiry into banning all sporting uses of lead , coincidence ?

At the time of the of the announcement , lost in the furore of covid panic, you clearly stated that shooting, without lead shot, could easily survive, as the cartridge manufacturers were on board, but... they really werent.

https://www.fieldsportschannel.tv/steelyourself/

[Conor O'Gorman]

2 hours ago, Rewulf said:

Yes Conor , I will put my hands up and admit I was a year out.
At least I can do that, as I seem to remember the 'Do you trust BASC' thread, where, for at least 10 pages you ducked and dived about the finances of the BASC fighting fund, telling everyone that it was clear to see where the money had gone, only to eventually admit that information was NOT, and still is NOT, for public or membership consumption, and this admission had to be literally dragged out of you.
Lets talk about the insults against me and others, we were anti shooting trolls for asking the question, as you repeatedly stated the question has been answered, when it clearly hadnt, and was never going to be.
So, if youre after an apology from me , I would expect one from you, for that clear and obvious error and attempt at misdirection ?
Im not holding my breath, as BASC has never admitted it was wrong on any of its many strategy errors.

My 'conspiracy' was that you had inside information that the HSE/DEFRA were going to attempt a lead ammunition ban.
If you didnt know it was coming, why did BASC put forward the 'phase out' ?
If you 'did know' that the EU was already putting forward plans to outlaw lead across the board, why did you just do the phase out for live quarry, and not clay shooting and other sports ?

If you truly believed that this day would come when all aspects of shooting would have to do without  lead projectiles, then why didnt BASC and the other shooting organisations do a large membership poll on how they wanted to play it ?
With the full support of membership, which you clearly dont have, would that not have been a stronger position to lobby with, because at the moment , most of us feel like BASC and the other orgs who signed up to the phase out, have, quite frankly , sold us out to protect their own interests... When those interests should be , first and foremost, the members who pay your wages.

If you have any further questions feel free to PM me and we can arrange a phone call to discuss. 

[Gordon R]

Rewulf's problem is that he has many questions, but doesn't seem to get proper answers.

Conor - I think you have tried that approach before, with no success. It surprises me that you continue to suggest it.

[Conor O'Gorman]

2 hours ago, Gordon R said:

Rewulf's problem is that he has many questions, but doesn't seem to get proper answers.

Conor - I think you have tried that approach before, with no success. It surprises me that you continue to suggest it.

If he/she gets in touch for a phone call we can make it a conference call to include you. 

[Gordon R]

My former career made me somewhat more of a cynic. Rewulf has raised matters on a public forum and I don't believe you have given proper answers. From where I sit, they seem evasive. You may agree or disagree.

There are those on here who get a bit shirty in their defence of BASC, saying what a wonderful job they do. They rarely answer specific questions, but have a pop at anyone who dares to question.

I have encountered a fair number of people who thought they could smooth matters over, by a face to face meeting or a phone call. Experience has taught me that matters raised in writing, need to be dealt with in writing.

[Weihrauch17]

2 hours ago, Conor O'Gorman said:

If he/she gets in touch for a phone call we can make it a conference call to include you. 

What's with the he or she bit, has BASC gone even further down the pan with Pronouns whatever they are, you really are doomed!

[udderlyoffroad]

10 hours ago, Weihrauch17 said:

What's with the he or she bit, has BASC gone even further down the pan with Pronouns whatever they are, you really are doomed!

Think you'll find he or she were the traditional options... 🤣

11 hours ago, Gordon R said:

I have encountered a fair number of people who thought they could smooth matters over, by a face to face meeting or a phone call. Experience has taught me that matters raised in writing, need to be dealt with in writing.

Experience taught me that the sometimes talking to people gets you further forward, then follow up with an email/whatever of what was discussed and conclusions.  Saves time.

But honestly, I do wish people would spend 1/10th of the effort debating the merits or otherwise of BASC and/or the lead ban or the orgs' voluntary phase out with you know....actually doing something useful.

E.g., responding to the consultation to let the HSE know that this proposed is counterproductive.

 

19 hours ago, Conor O'Gorman said:

As regards Brexit - that is why the HSE was tasked with reviewing lead in ammunition and many many other substances. That said, without Brexit we would be amidst the EU lead ban proposals currently being finalised.

I was more alluding to supply issues of biowads and steel shot to the UK rather than EU REACH vs UK REACH...

As it happens I deal with both flavours of REACH in the day job - the EU outfits seem to be far more susceptible to lobbying than the UK version.  This presumably is the goal FACE is working towards.

[Gordon R]

Quote

 

Experience taught me that the sometimes talking to people gets you further forward, then follow up with an email/whatever of what was discussed and conclusions.  Saves time.

But honestly, I do wish people would spend 1/10th of the effort debating the merits or otherwise of BASC and/or the lead ban or the orgs' voluntary phase out with you know....actually doing something useful.

E.g., responding to the consultation to let the HSE know that this proposed is counterproductive.

 

udderlyoffroad - when both parties are trying to genuinely resolve a problem, you won't get an argument from me. However, when you suspect someone isn't really trying to answer questions, a telephone call or face to face can be used to keep a lid on things. 

Both Rewulf and I have completed the consultation.

[Rewulf]

2 hours ago, udderlyoffroad said:

But honestly, I do wish people would spend 1/10th of the effort debating the merits or otherwise of BASC and/or the lead ban or the orgs' voluntary phase out with you know....actually doing something useful.

I spent 45 minutes last night talking to a group of 30 at an AGM, well over half were BASC members.
I spoke about the need to do the consultation , and the probable outcomes, only one of them had already done the consultation
One gentleman protested that lead would not be banned at clay grounds, as BASC had told him that lead removal would mean they could carry on using it.
I explained that lead removal was an expensive and often impossible task over rough, forested or wet ground, he insisted that 'most' clay grounds already did it, using 'machines'.
I asked him what these machines looked like, but he didnt have a clue, or how they worked.
I ran a clay ground for many years, and use many others, Ive never heard of a clay ground removing lead shot.
Broken clays yes, empty carts and plastic wads where accessible could and should be removed periodically, but many grounds make no attempt whatsoever.

If our shooting orgs are to make any headway in this battle, they need to do a better job of educating people on how it can be fought.
I can only reach so many people, BASC has the resources to reach many thousands, whether the message gets across is another matter, maybe the message needs to be changed, or the delivery method ?

[udderlyoffroad]

Genuinely, hats off to both @Gordon R & @Rewulf for their efforts...

 

3 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

insisted that 'most' clay grounds already did it, using 'machines'.
I asked him what these machines looked like, but he didnt have a clue, or how they worked.

Same as 'TV detector' vans, doncha know, the JFM drive.

If only lead was magnetic, then it could be detected easily & removed.  We should replace it with some sort of ferritic material... 🤣

[Gordon R]

I recall suggestions that the landowners of what was the A6 gun club at Westhoughton planned to recover the lead from the land. Given that the club mainly did DTL, it would mean that lead shot would land in a relative proximity on a flat terrain. It never materialised.

The same task, at a clay ground who did sporting, would be far more difficult

[Rewulf]

46 minutes ago, udderlyoffroad said:

We should replace it with some sort of ferritic material... 🤣

But then we wouldnt need to, as steel is 'non toxic' 
I also believe the wading birds they are so worried about would know the difference between lead and steel, and it wouldnt end up in their gizzards... wouldnt it ??
After a few years , any rust coloured water run off shouldnt worry anyone either, its non toxic ?

How long before they decide copper bullets and steel/bismuth shot are toxic too.
Anyone fancy learning target sports with spears, and hunting with bows , axe throwing ?

10 minutes ago, Gordon R said:

The same task, at a clay ground who did sporting, would be far more difficult

I cant think of a single clay ground I have ever shot at, that didnt have wooded areas, water features or dykes.
The one I used to run , we shot out over a several fields of wheat, the farmer said it was fine !

[Rewulf]

This is an example of lead shot extraction from a former clay ground, they estimated they removed 72% of the lead.
The costs were not disclosed, but I doubt many clay grounds would be interested in this process, even if it were free.

[Scully]

I had great success at persuading my syndicate to fill in the consultation first time around, and was quite surprised; they even filled in the Welsh one! 
I sent the link for the current one as soon as it appeared on here, and only two responded. Of those two I am pretty sure only one has actually done it. 
Last weekend when I mentioned it there were a few ‘ I thought we’d already done that’ responses, and then the usual looking the other way or changing the subject. 
I am the only one in that syndicate of 14 shooters who ISN’T a BASC member! 

The topic hasn’t arisen in the beaters wagon on BIG shoot this season, but last season it was met with ‘it’s going to happen anyway’ ( ex copper…..have I mentioned how much I dislike them? 😂 ) and yes it is, and we’re all going to die someday too, but that doesn’t stop us trying to enjoy ourselves in the meantime! Ones a keeper for crying out loud! His job depends on shooting! 
Some may think I’m a pain in the backside, and I probably am but I don’t care, but what really annoys me is the sullen silence you’re met with when you point out to someone that they have no right to complain if they don’t at least make an effort. They think I’m the problem! 🤬
If I had hair I’d be pulling it out! 

[rbrowning2]

Think John Bidwell recovered the lead from his skeet ranges, as has been shown it is a very intrusive process and totally impractical for virtually all English/FITAS sporting grounds. 

Probably if the ground has been shot over frequently for many years like a skeet layout then the first time the lead is recovered then financially it could be beneficial, however if subsequent lead remove is annual then that would probably cost more to do then the value of lead extracted.

Edited November 9, 2023 by rbrowning2

[Terry2016]

On 09/11/2023 at 13:09, Rewulf said:

I spent 45 minutes last night talking to a group of 30 at an AGM, well over half were BASC members.
I spoke about the need to do the consultation , and the probable outcomes, only one of them had already done the consultation
One gentleman protested that lead would not be banned at clay grounds, as BASC had told him that lead removal would mean they could carry on using it.
I explained that lead removal was an expensive and often impossible task over rough, forested or wet ground, he insisted that 'most' clay grounds already did it, using 'machines'.
I asked him what these machines looked like, but he didnt have a clue, or how they worked.
I ran a clay ground for many years, and use many others, Ive never heard of a clay ground removing lead shot.
Broken clays yes, empty carts and plastic wads where accessible could and should be removed periodically, but many grounds make no attempt whatsoever.

If our shooting orgs are to make any headway in this battle, they need to do a better job of educating people on how it can be fought.
I can only reach so many people, BASC has the resources to reach many thousands, whether the message gets across is another matter, maybe the message needs to be changed, or the delivery method ?

Why didn't you invite BASC to your AGM. this can be arranged. then all questions can be answered transparently .

 

 

 

Edited November 10, 2023 by Terry2016

[grahamch]

There are one or two folk on this thread who are more than boring and repetitive and should be blocked. 

[Scully]

3 minutes ago, grahamch said:

There are one or two folk on this thread who are more than boring and repetitive and should be blocked. 

I agree. Quite ironic actually. 

[Rewulf]

2 hours ago, Terry2016 said:

Why didn't you invite BASC to your AGM. this can be arranged. then all questions can be answered transparently .

 

 

 

I couldn't confidently guarantee their safety 😂

 

1 hour ago, Scully said:

I agree. Quite ironic actually. 

🤣👍

[yickdaz]

2 hours ago, grahamch said:

There are one or two folk on this thread who are more than boring and repetitive and should be blocked. 

👍

[Penelope]

On 10/11/2023 at 20:34, Scully said:

I agree. Quite ironic actually. 

😁

[Conor O'Gorman]

On 09/11/2023 at 09:43, udderlyoffroad said:

As it happens I deal with both flavours of REACH in the day job - the EU outfits seem to be far more susceptible to lobbying than the UK version.  This presumably is the goal FACE is working towards.

Thanks. That is interesting to hear. So far we seem to making greater progress with HSE for GB lead ammunition review than with ECHA for EU lead ammunition review. But who knows what may happen at political stage for MPs considering draft legislation in Westminster versus MEPs considering draft legislation in European Parliament.