Anyone?

[Fil]

On 21/01/2024 at 18:47, Scully said:

A few comments in another thread by various people and one by @Old farrierstating which cartridges he used for high driven birds, primarily because I use the same cartridges, had me thinking. 
Part of my job on a big local commercial shoot is to collect empty cases from pegs after each drive. Last season I came across a few Eley non toxic loads and what was left of their eco wads, but the vast vast majority were lead shot loads, and this season I haven’t collected any non toxic cases at all. It’s worth mentioning that guns on this shoot travel from all over the country. 
In total I’m involved in around four local shoots either as a beater or a shooter, and I know countless shooters, none of whom are using non toxic shot.

I’m aware Warter Priory have apparently made the move to non toxic shot, and BASC have stated they have received commitments from various sections of the shooting community to make the transition, but am unaware if any have of those have actually done so. 
This seasons almost over and it won’t be long until the Wetlands Trust and other anti shooting organisations will be buying shot game to test for lead shot to bolster their agenda. They will undoubtedly find it as there is no reason why it shouldn’t be there. 
Do any live quarry shooters ( except wildfowlers ) and in particular driven game shooters on PW, know of anyone who has foregone lead shot for non toxic? 

My question to you @Conor O'Gormanis BASC ready to respond to antis when they attempt to make hay with the fact that the dead birds they have bought and tested, contain lead shot? If so what will that response consist of?

Given that manufacturers are still making and indeed continue to develop lead loads and some gun manufacturers are still designing guns to specifically handle those lead high bird loads, will BASC inform those people that there is absolutely no reason why those birds shouldn’t contain lead shot, given that it is perfectly legal to use lead shot? 
 

As a cartridge seller albeit not in a big way a lot of estates I supply and individuals have reverted to lead this season. Last two years everyone followed the "transition" but this they have given it two fingers and gone back to lead until forced by law. 

[Fil]

On 21/01/2024 at 20:31, Conor O'Gorman said:

Below is an article from outside our sector reacting to BASC's response last year to the annual review of lead in game meat research. 

https://raptorpersecutionuk.org/2023/04/24/basc-slurs-expert-study-on-amount-of-toxic-lead-ammunition-in-pheasants-as-pseudoscience/

The annual review is called ShotSwitch and is here:

https://eri.ac.uk/research/major-projects/shot-switch/

Considering your question my thoughts are as follows.

There are those outside the shooting sector that want to see a total ban on lead ammunition - these are organisations and academics that do not care about the consequences for shooting - they think we can just flick a switch and get the job done if forced to do so legally. Their primary concern is to stop the poisoning of a wide range of bird species from our continued use of lead shot in the open countryside where its availability to bird to pick up cannot be controlled, and their concerns about evidence of widespread non-compliance by shoots with existing lead shot restrictions in place for 20 years. A total lead ban of course does not target the risk - which is the use lead shot for live quarry shooting - but from an enforcement point of view and a lobbying point of view - is a simple solution to a complex issue.

Then there are those within the sector that want to see the status quo continue forever. They argue against the evidence that has been reviewed and accepted by our own scientists at GWCT - and anyone with a different opinion is dismissed as an anti.

The middle ground is about finding a solution and that is where the shooting organisations come in.

The voluntary transition away from lead shot for live quarry shooting needs continued support if we are to avoid the cliff edge of legislation and that has been the core of communications on this issue for almost 4 years now and I would urge you @Scully and others with local connections to shoots up and down the country to encourage that change in practice rather than principle.

Those knocking BASC and other organisations for encouraging a voluntary transition do the future of shooting no favours, albeit resistance to change is understandable and indeed the pathway to change has been documented in detail for Denmark here: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30506141/ 

Also there are moves worldwide with hunters supporting and advocating a change in approach and accepting the evidence justifying that change. 

I've always said and will continue to say that "volunteering" away a bit by bit of our past time is not the way to go. We will NEVER appease those that are against shooting. Anyone who thinks it will is deluded. It will never get my support. And I vehemently disagree with your comment that "Those knocking BASC and other organisations for encouraging a voluntary transition do the future of shooting no favours". Most if not all I speak to on a daily basis in my establishment and in the shooting agree and only give you money because of the compulsory shooting insurance that they require for their shooting syndicate. I have however enlightened them that other groups exist that offer equal shooting insurance that do not allow the chip chip chip away of our past time. 

[dogone]

  In Canada and USA we have had to use steel/ bismuth or whatever for over 20 years. Only on waterfowl,not Huns or grouse. The loads seem to have been perfected for waterfowl. Waterfowlers have adapted and no one complains anymore. There are loads effective to over 60 yards on geese. They are similar in price to lead so that doesn’t seem to be an issue. Youngsters don’t even remember using lead.

Edited January 24 by dogone

[rbrowning2]

4 hours ago, dogone said:

  In Canada and USA we have had to use steel/ tungsten or whatever for over 20 years. Only on waterfowl,not Huns or grouse. The loads seem to have been perfected for waterfowl. Waterfowlers have adapted and no one complains anymore. There are loads effective to over 60 yards on geese. They are similar in price to lead so that doesn’t seem to be an issue. Youngsters don’t even remember using lead.

So have we for wildfowl.

You can buy tungsten cartridges for similar price of lead?

[oowee]

16 minutes ago, rbrowning2 said:

So have we for wildfowl.

You can buy tungsten cartridges for similar price of lead?

 

4 hours ago, dogone said:

  In Canada and USA we have had to use steel/ tungsten or whatever for over 20 years. Only on waterfowl,not Huns or grouse. The loads seem to have been perfected for waterfowl. Waterfowlers have adapted and no one complains anymore. There are loads effective to over 60 yards on geese. They are similar in price to lead so that doesn’t seem to be an issue. Youngsters don’t even remember using lead.

That's good to know. So why are we complaining? 

[Poor Shot]

15 hours ago, London Best said:

My thoughts on your first paragraph are that more expensive cartridges will only increase your costs on your small syndicate shoot by the same percentage as if you were shooting more expensive days. 
This has to be the case as you may only be firing a couple of boxes per season compared to a couple of boxes per drive?

I'm not sure on the angle of your comment but yes, that would be correct. More birds, more shots and therefore more cost. 

I'm sure someone who is able to spend multiple thousands on a days shooting has a lot more disposable income and is less likely to become as perturbed by having to spend an extra £60 per slab of cartridges as I would be spending an extra £60 for a single slab of cartridges but the thought process is similar. 

If the more well off shooter was previously happy with an Eley VIP or something similar for £90-£100 per slab then why would they not be less happy to pay £45-£55 more per slab for a cartridge that is less effective, not really that great to shoot through their grandads heirloom Purdy or other lightweight game gun and with the possibility that the biowad could fail and render their very expensive guns relatively valueless without expensive rebarreling work.  

Whether it adds £200 to the cost of a £2.5k day or £60 to the cost of a £900 syndicate place is irrelevant. The scale remains roughly the same. 

[Poor Shot]

5 hours ago, dogone said:

  In Canada and USA we have had to use steel/ tungsten or whatever for over 20 years. Only on waterfowl,not Huns or grouse. The loads seem to have been perfected for waterfowl. Waterfowlers have adapted and no one complains anymore. There are loads effective to over 60 yards on geese. They are similar in price to lead so that doesn’t seem to be an issue. Youngsters don’t even remember using lead.

We don't have the luxury of not having to worry about the proofing of cartridges and guns and the limitations that come with that. 

Steel would probably be just as effective as lead if we could push them at over 1800 FPS but right now we are limited something silly like 1400 fps with limits on load and shot size for a standard rated steel cartridge in a 2 and 3/4 inch case or 70mm case. 

A bismuth cartridge will be well over £1.50 per shot vs around £0.30 - £0.45 for a lead equivalent and £2.50+ for a tungsten or ITX cartridge. 

Edited January 23 by Poor Shot

[Scully]

1 hour ago, oowee said:

 

That's good to know. So why are we complaining? 

Because we cannot use similar ammunition; they are allowed to use full strength beer, we are only allowed shandy…..for want of a comparison. 

[Fil]

5 hours ago, dogone said:

  In Canada and USA we have had to use steel/ tungsten or whatever for over 20 years. Only on waterfowl,not Huns or grouse. The loads seem to have been perfected for waterfowl. Waterfowlers have adapted and no one complains anymore. There are loads effective to over 60 yards on geese. They are similar in price to lead so that doesn’t seem to be an issue. Youngsters don’t even remember using lead.

We have done the same on waterfowl in the UK since the 90's. Loads got the same perfection. Steel was even cheaper than lead when we were allowed to shoot plas wads. What we are talking about here is non lead on grouse, pheasant etc. We don't/can't use cheap plas wad steel loads. We are now told to use these new steel loads with biodegradable wads which can be as much as 50% more per box than our favourite lead load. We don't shoot game with pumps or autos. So we are looking for an affective, reasonably priced, safe and humane load for our old vintage guns. Bismuth here for me is anything from £400 - £450.00 for 250 cartridges and therefore not an option. Yes I understand your point but we are talking something different.

[oowee]

1 hour ago, Scully said:

Because we cannot use similar ammunition; they are allowed to use full strength beer, we are only allowed shandy…..for want of a comparison. 

Ah got you. 

1 hour ago, Fil said:

We have done the same on waterfowl in the UK since the 90's. Loads got the same perfection. Steel was even cheaper than lead when we were allowed to shoot plas wads. What we are talking about here is non lead on grouse, pheasant etc. We don't/can't use cheap plas wad steel loads. We are now told to use these new steel loads with biodegradable wads which can be as much as 50% more per box than our favourite lead load. We don't shoot game with pumps or autos. So we are looking for an affective, reasonably priced, safe and humane load for our old vintage guns. Bismuth here for me is anything from £400 - £450.00 for 250 cartridges and therefore not an option. Yes I understand your point but we are talking something different.

👍

[Penelope]

7 hours ago, dogone said:

  In Canada and USA we have had to use steel/ tungsten or whatever for over 20 years. Only on waterfowl,not Huns or grouse. The loads seem to have been perfected for waterfowl. Waterfowlers have adapted and no one complains anymore. There are loads effective to over 60 yards on geese. They are similar in price to lead so that doesn’t seem to be an issue. Youngsters don’t even remember using lead.

English, not Hungarian 😉😄

[Fellside]

2 hours ago, Scully said:

Because we cannot use similar ammunition; they are allowed to use full strength beer, we are only allowed shandy…..for want of a comparison. 

Yes exactly! I made this point in a different thread recently - i.e CIP and SAMMI need to take their foot off the brake re steel velocity limits. 

As a further point, if we are permitted to use higher velocities (per USA), semi autos will become extremely popular for taming the recoil…..!

[HantsRob]

22 hours ago, Gordon R said:

A small point:-

I would be interested in where the proof for this statement is. The replies on this forum and statistics cited would suggest the complete opposite.

 

 

I'd suggest the lack of plaswad ammo Vs fibre in most gun shops (statement from personal experience only) could show that it is a success from the voluntary transition away from plastic. 

I would be mindful that it is a liberal use of the word "voluntary" as it is not by my choice, but by what is being purchased by the vendor at that price point.

[mgsontour]

On 22/01/2024 at 13:54, Konor said:

Do you think the increase you've noted might be due to some shooters clearing their stock of lead ammunition in preparation for change? 

There is defiantly this going on as you say now you mention it; also when gorgeous George from stonedead/proper cartridges got closed down there was a lot of his stock getting sold around here so guess people bought cheap and filled their boots when the opportunity was there.

For anyone who is interested, those Eley pro eco wad carts are hard hitting for sure

[Gordon R]

HantsRob - most shoots I attend insist on fibre wads only. I don't see that as supporting the move to steel or single use  (bio-degradable) plastic wads.

[oowee]

27 minutes ago, Gordon R said:

HantsRob - most shoots I attend insist on fibre wads only. I don't see that as supporting the move to steel or single use  (bio-degradable) plastic wads.

Surely its more a reaction to the concern of livestock eating the plas wads? All of the farms I shoot insist on no plas wads. 

[Gordon R]

Not sure what the same farmers are going to do if we go to steel shot. The steel shot has to be fully enclosed by a much larger wad, which won't degrade in minutes. The larger wads will be lying around for weeks / months.

Gamebore claim that their 30 Day in-Field Degredation Bio Wad will biodegrade over the course of a season. I thought a season was three months - which would cast doubt over the "30 Day" name.

[Smudger687]

6 hours ago, Poor Shot said:

We don't have the luxury of not having to worry about the proofing of cartridges and guns and the limitations that come with that. 

Steel would probably be just as effective as lead if we could push them at over 1800 FPS but right now we are limited something silly like 1400 fps with limits on load and shot size for a standard rated steel cartridge in a 2 and 3/4 inch case or 70mm case. 

A bismuth cartridge will be well over £1.50 per shot vs around £0.30 - £0.45 for a lead equivalent and £2.50+ for a tungsten or ITX cartridge. 

Velocity is not the way to get more lethality out of steel shot, more payload, bigger pellets and tighter chokes are.

An 1800 fps steel cartridge would need to use a miniscule payload to keep pressures down, and at 40 yards it's barely faster than if it were doing 1350 fps.

High velocity shells do, however, give much more recoil, more blast, and faster pattern degradation. 

[Scully]

58 minutes ago, oowee said:

Surely its more a reaction to the concern of livestock eating the plas wads? All of the farms I shoot insist on no plas wads. 

Some farmers express a preference, some don’t. 
None of the farmers I know are concerned about the use of plastic wads as they say they won’t be eaten, but they wouldn’t like them littered all over their land. 

[grahamch]

Was beating  at a shoot on Saturday where a chap from BASC was a gun. He used Gamebore Blackstorm steel 5s and was killing birds just as well as those using lead loads. 

[8 shot]

As I've said before, we grow high end Equestrian Fodder and any contamination is a rejection and costly to income and reputation so are small farm shoot will cease, also I don't know what we'll do for pest control, pigeon, crows etc, I've tried some Bio wads. Eley Eco Wads are by far the quickest to degrade but were only available in No.3s at the time which are HP proof and completely ineffective on small quarry like crows pigeon etc. at any range above 30 yards due to a sparse pattern. Hull Hydrowad by all accounts takes months to degrade. Going to try the Gamebore offerings this spring.

2 hours ago, Gordon R said:

Not sure what the same farmers are going to do if we go to steel shot. The steel shot has to be fully enclosed by a much larger wad, which won't degrade in minutes. The larger wads will be lying around for weeks / months.

 

[Conor O'Gorman]

21 hours ago, rbrowning2 said:

However they all relate to the same common subject, shoots going non toxic so are not mutually exclusive.

I know what you mean, it is a potentially confusing set of stats, but do I think its each question is to be considered on its own merits, but I could be wrong, and in any case it would be interesting to see the same stats question by question for the subsequent survey - that would give us something to go on as regards which direction its going as regards attitudes.

[Conor O'Gorman]

19 hours ago, Fil said:

I've always said and will continue to say that "volunteering" away a bit by bit of our past time is not the way to go. We will NEVER appease those that are against shooting. Anyone who thinks it will is deluded. It will never get my support. And I vehemently disagree with your comment that "Those knocking BASC and other organisations for encouraging a voluntary transition do the future of shooting no favours". Most if not all I speak to on a daily basis in my establishment and in the shooting agree and only give you money because of the compulsory shooting insurance that they require for their shooting syndicate. I have however enlightened them that other groups exist that offer equal shooting insurance that do not allow the chip chip chip away of our past time. 

Thanks for the feedback and I have given it some thought.

I agree with you on the dangers of appeasement - and another viewpoint might be that the voluntary measures taking place in recent years in the UK to move away from lead shot and single use plastics for shotgun cartridges used in live quarry shooting are not only about doing the right thing for the environment (we have a proud history of conservation in the UK and want a sustainable future for live quarry shooting) but also about preparing for what might come. 

Some might say that this is not appeasement, its being pragmatic. But I accept there will be varying viewpoints on that and it will be a case of judging current events down the line with the advantage of hindsight.

On that note, we have had many years forewarning of what is happening in the EU - and the way things are shaping up, its not a matter of if, but when, restrictions on lead ammunition take force, despite the combined forces of every hunting organisation across Europe fighting against a ban. And lead bans happening all around Europe will impact in many ways on the continued use of lead ammunition in the UK. 

Brexit gave us a year's grace from what was happening on the lead ammo ban front in the EU until the UK government created similar legislation and processes taking place in the EU to ensure continued trade in chemicals - and that is why in 2021 we saw the launch of a lead ammunition review along the same lines as what was already happening in the EU - amongst hundreds of other reviews for other chemicals - in other words, no conspiracy against shooting, just a political/policy reality we have been caught up in as a sector using lead.

The academics and organisations seeking a lead ban were dismayed by the announcement of a lead ammunition review in 2021. They saw this as kicking the can down the road. They have wanted a full lead ban for many years regardless of the evidence and regardless of the consequences for shooting.

And that is where BASC in particular comes in. 

We have successfully pushed back on lead ban proposals here in the UK for decades. 

Most recently, last year's proposals to ban the outdoor use of lead airgun pellets have been dropped. And it looks like proposals to ban the outdoor recreational use of lead rifle ammo will be dropped. There is still work to do on the outdoor recreational use of lead shot. And lots more in-between - it is a complex issue.
 
Latest update here: https://basc.org.uk/basc-response-to-hse-lead-ammunition-consultation/

Also consider that thanks to devolution the administrations in Wales, Scotland and NI have the power to put in place lead bans as they wish and not await the HSE lead ammunition review outcome.

As regards shooting clubs and syndicates affiliated to BASC or considering doing so, it is a fantastic package as outlined in a recent article as follows:

https://basc.org.uk/should-you-join-our-savvy-basc-syndicate-members/

[Fil]

3 hours ago, Conor O'Gorman said:

Thanks for the feedback and I have given it some thought.

I agree with you on the dangers of appeasement - and another viewpoint might be that the voluntary measures taking place in recent years in the UK to move away from lead shot and single use plastics for shotgun cartridges used in live quarry shooting are not only about doing the right thing for the environment (we have a proud history of conservation in the UK and want a sustainable future for live quarry shooting) but also about preparing for what might come. 

Some might say that this is not appeasement, its being pragmatic. But I accept there will be varying viewpoints on that and it will be a case of judging current events down the line with the advantage of hindsight.

On that note, we have had many years forewarning of what is happening in the EU - and the way things are shaping up, its not a matter of if, but when, restrictions on lead ammunition take force, despite the combined forces of every hunting organisation across Europe fighting against a ban. And lead bans happening all around Europe will impact in many ways on the continued use of lead ammunition in the UK. 

Brexit gave us a year's grace from what was happening on the lead ammo ban front in the EU until the UK government created similar legislation and processes taking place in the EU to ensure continued trade in chemicals - and that is why in 2021 we saw the launch of a lead ammunition review along the same lines as what was already happening in the EU - amongst hundreds of other reviews for other chemicals - in other words, no conspiracy against shooting, just a political/policy reality we have been caught up in as a sector using lead.

The academics and organisations seeking a lead ban were dismayed by the announcement of a lead ammunition review in 2021. They saw this as kicking the can down the road. They have wanted a full lead ban for many years regardless of the evidence and regardless of the consequences for shooting.

And that is where BASC in particular comes in. 

We have successfully pushed back on lead ban proposals here in the UK for decades. 

Most recently, last year's proposals to ban the outdoor use of lead airgun pellets have been dropped. And it looks like proposals to ban the outdoor recreational use of lead rifle ammo will be dropped. There is still work to do on the outdoor recreational use of lead shot. And lots more in-between - it is a complex issue.
 
Latest update here: https://basc.org.uk/basc-response-to-hse-lead-ammunition-consultation/

Also consider that thanks to devolution the administrations in Wales, Scotland and NI have the power to put in place lead bans as they wish and not await the HSE lead ammunition review outcome.

As regards shooting clubs and syndicates affiliated to BASC or considering doing so, it is a fantastic package as outlined in a recent article as follows:

https://basc.org.uk/should-you-join-our-savvy-basc-syndicate-members/

Conor, I admire your full and comprehensive reply.  A lot of what you said is what I have heard already from other organisations (such as the GTA) But I didn't want to accept or believe it. And I have to say that I am with you on that. Great post. 

[Fil]

But it doesn't mean that I want to give up my Eley Impax 28g 6's or think that I am going to bow down to the EU and their lead bans when I voted for brexit hoping that our firearms laws were going away from the EU for UK firearms laws dammit!!! LOL