BASC update on voluntary transition away from lead shot and and single-use plastics for live quarry

[Rewulf]

29 minutes ago, Gordon R said:

was it just a cosy meeting where some bright spark suggested phasing out lead

Was it the same one where Swifty got his honorary membership ?

[grahamch]

9 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

Was it the same one where Swifty got his honorary membership ?

Why do you keep bringing up the same point which is irrelevant ancient history?

 

[Gordon R]

Are we sure it is irrelevant?

[Rewulf]

8 minutes ago, Gordon R said:

Are we sure it is irrelevant?

[Fellside]

3 hours ago, Conor O'Gorman said:

Actually, there was one new study in that search - from Scotland. If you spot others do let me know.

Incidence of lead ingestion in managed goose populations and the efficacy of imposed restrictions on the use of lead shot

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/ibi.13210

Thanks for the info. I would suggest the great bulk of studies are about wetlands/wildfowl. I do acknowledge that they are vulnerable. I think ‘clean’ evidence re direct impacts on terrestrial fauna is still scant. There does appear however, to be a reasonable case for secondary impacts re birds of prey ingesting lead from wounded birds or carrion containing lead pellets. 

[Smudger687]

3 hours ago, Conor O'Gorman said:

The voluntary transition was in response to consideration of wildlife, the environment and to ensure a market for game meat in the UK and overseas; for the shooting community to maintain its place at the forefront of wildlife conservation and protection, sustainability in our practices being of utmost importance; and in response to significant developments in the quality and availability of non-lead shotgun cartridges, and that plastic cases could be recycled; and in response to the availability of biodegradable shot cups for steel shot, with the necessary ballistics to ensure lethality.

So when Konor (I think) said earlier in this thread that BASC proposed the transition so as to allow the big commercial shoots to keep shooting big bags under the guise of "harvesting" for consumption, you pushed back on it. Yet here you admit that it was done at least in part to ensure a market for game. And of course the biggest sellers on the game market are the big commercial shoots. 

I also have to say that the rest of your reasoning doesn't quite make sense to me either; BASC proposed a move away from lead and plastic partly because of the availability of biodegradable shot cups for steel, yet a 5 year transition period is needed because manufacturers don't have the tooling or machinery to make steel biowads?

Edited April 12 by Smudger687

[Conor O'Gorman]

51 minutes ago, Fellside said:

Thanks for the info. I would suggest the great bulk of studies are about wetlands/wildfowl. I do acknowledge that they are vulnerable. I think ‘clean’ evidence re direct impacts on terrestrial fauna is still scant. There does appear however, to be a reasonable case for secondary impacts re birds of prey ingesting lead from wounded birds or carrion containing lead pellets. 

I think you are right on there being more studies for wetlands/wildfowl.  The evidence weight of evidence from all sources has been reviewed by the GWCT and they support the voluntary transition. 

https://www.gwct.org.uk/advisory/lead-ammunition/effects-of-lead-on-wildlife-and-wildfowl/

I have not personally reviewed all the evidence, but GWCT scientists have, and their conclusion and advice thus far is good enough for me. How about you?

 

[Conor O'Gorman]

41 minutes ago, Smudger687 said:

So when Konor (I think) said earlier in this thread that BASC proposed the transition so as to allow the big commercial shoots to keep shooting big bags under the guise of "harvesting" for consumption, you pushed back on it. Yet here you admit that it was done at least in part to ensure a market for game. And of course the biggest sellers on the game market are the big commercial shoots. 

I also have to say that the rest of your reasoning doesn't quite make sense to me either; BASC proposed a move away from lead and plastic partly because of the availability of biodegradable shot cups for steel, yet a 5 year transition period is needed because manufacturers don't have the tooling or machinery to make steel biowads?

It was not Konor it was someone else. It was not BASC it was nine organisations. The text I have provided to Scully is copy and pasted from the joint announcement made 4 years ago by nine organisations. I realise that the facts are challenging for some forum members who just won't see the facts for what they are and rather looking for conspiracies that do not exist because they have never read anything on the topic other than each other's misinformed posts. It is incredible really. Would you agree?

[Weihrauch17]

3 hours ago, Gordon R said:

Are we sure it is irrelevant?

Absolutely relevant given his stance on Lead and influence with BASC. 

1 hour ago, Conor O'Gorman said:

It was not Konor it was someone else. It was not BASC it was nine organisations. The text I have provided to Scully is copy and pasted from the joint announcement made 4 years ago by nine organisations. I realise that the facts are challenging for some forum members who just won't see the facts for what they are and rather looking for conspiracies that do not exist because they have never read anything on the topic other than each other's misinformed posts. It is incredible really. Would you agree?

It is incredible how Patronising you are.  The 'facts' you present as set in stone are simply not proven facts just rhetoric for an agenda.  The results of scientific reports depend entirely on who is funding them.  The irony is you and other Org's supporting this idiocy will probably put yourselves out of business, every cloud and all that.

Edited April 12 by Weihrauch17

[Smudger687]

16 minutes ago, Conor O'Gorman said:

It was not Konor it was someone else. It was not BASC it was nine organisations. The text I have provided to Scully is copy and pasted from the joint announcement made 4 years ago by nine organisations. I realise that the facts are challenging for some forum members who just won't see the facts for what they are and rather looking for conspiracies that do not exist because they have never read anything on the topic other than each other's misinformed posts. It is incredible really. Would you agree?

A senior BASC representative told me in person that the reason for the lead ban was because the continental market for shot game needed to be kept open. Again, you may disagree with this, but this is what was told to me, and your recent post does suggest there's some truth to this. 

You've just said that biowad availability was a factor in the transition - if this were the case why did manufacturers need 5 years to move over? Why did the manufacturers all come together and publicly state that they'd not had discussions with BASC about a move to non-tox, and that achieving it within a 5 year timescale was delusional. Even now, there's no biowad that even comes close to the performance of a standard plaswad. 5 years ago the Gamebore silver steel cartridge was the only biodegradable steel shot option on the market, and was offered in a 3 inch 32g 4 option only. Hardly what anyone could describe as widely available.

I would also point out that BASC has repeatedly published demonstrable falsehoods when it comes to steel shot performance, and refuses to listen to criticism or take correction.

Taken in totality, very few people feel that BASC is being truthful. You are of course free to label myself and others as conspiracy theorists, but our opinions are the result of BASC's unforced errors. 

[Gordon R]

Quote

 It is incredible really. Would you agree?

Conor - For once I have to agree with you. You manage more posts than I could point a stick at, but show me where you answer a simple question.

Please don't post another irrelevant  link. If it wasn't for the fact that you represent BASC, it would be amusing.

[Conor O'Gorman]

1 hour ago, Smudger687 said:

A senior BASC representative told me in person that the reason for the lead ban was because the continental market for shot game needed to be kept open. Again, you may disagree with this, but this is what was told to me, and your recent post does suggest there's some truth to this. 

You've just said that biowad availability was a factor in the transition - if this were the case why did manufacturers need 5 years to move over? Why did the manufacturers all come together and publicly state that they'd not had discussions with BASC about a move to non-tox, and that achieving it within a 5 year timescale was delusional. Even now, there's no biowad that even comes close to the performance of a standard plaswad. 5 years ago the Gamebore silver steel cartridge was the only biodegradable steel shot option on the market, and was offered in a 3 inch 32g 4 option only. Hardly what anyone could describe as widely available.

I would also point out that BASC has repeatedly published demonstrable falsehoods when it comes to steel shot performance, and refuses to listen to criticism or take correction.

Taken in totality, very few people feel that BASC is being truthful. You are of course free to label myself and others as conspiracy theorists, but our opinions are the result of BASC's unforced errors. 

You talk of a lead ban. There was and is no lead ban. There is a voluntary transition away from lead shot and single use plastics for live quarry shooting. Here is the statement by nine organisations from February 2020 on the reasons why, which includes reference to a "market for the healthiest game products, at home and abroad":

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

So whatever you were told by that staff member was either incorrect relative to the position above, or misinterpreted/misunderstood by you. The latter is a possibility given you refer to the voluntary transition as a lead ban.

As for biowads, innovation continues - the transition is ongoing. Your view that "there's no biowad that even comes close to the performance of a standard plaswad" is your view and not a fact. On that note my understanding of your claim that BASC has published falsehoods on steel shot performance is because your personal view and experience differs from BASC's collective view and experience. That's actually a difference of opinion. However, if you really have conviction in your belief and are a BASC member perhaps submit a complaint to BASC.

You assert that "very few people feel that BASC is being truthful". What is 'truthful' and who are these 'very few people'? 

[Smudger687]

42 minutes ago, Conor O'Gorman said:

You talk of a lead ban. There was and is no lead ban. There is a voluntary transition away from lead shot and single use plastics for live quarry shooting. Here is the statement by nine organisations from February 2020 on the reasons why, which includes reference to a "market for the healthiest game products, at home and abroad":

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

So whatever you were told by that staff member was either incorrect relative to the position above, or misinterpreted/misunderstood by you. The latter is a possibility given you refer to the voluntary transition as a lead ban.

As for biowads, innovation continues - the transition is ongoing. Your view that "there's no biowad that even comes close to the performance of a standard plaswad" is your view and not a fact. On that note my understanding of your claim that BASC has published falsehoods on steel shot performance is because your personal view and experience differs from BASC's collective view and experience. That's actually a difference of opinion. However, if you really have conviction in your belief and are a BASC member perhaps submit a complaint to BASC.

You assert that "very few people feel that BASC is being truthful". What is 'truthful' and who are these 'very few people'? 

I provided empirical evidence and mathematics on the topic of steel shot performance. You were repeatedly invited to provide contradictory evidence and you never did. It is not a difference of opinion. If you have evidence that shows steel performs as well as lead, let's hear it, better late than never I suppose. 

We all refer to the "voluntary transition" as a lead ban. Don't be a pedant, it's silly.  

My comments on biowads stem from extensive use of fibre cups in homeloads, from decomposition and field tests of market offerings, and researching the polymers used to produce them. I know that your colleagues probably tell you that steel is great and the biowads are fantastic, but last I remember you do walked up days and I can't imagine you use much steel on them. I would hazard a guess that your first hand experience of biosteels isn't particularly extensive. 

God bless you Conor. I can understand that the regular slatings you take on this forum every time steel is mentioned can make you quite defensive. I wouldn't like it either. But repeatedly ignoring everyone's objections does you no favours. You're not like this on other unrelated topics, it's very disappointing.

 

Edited April 12 by Smudger687

[Fellside]

2 hours ago, Conor O'Gorman said:

I think you are right on there being more studies for wetlands/wildfowl.  The evidence weight of evidence from all sources has been reviewed by the GWCT and they support the voluntary transition. 

https://www.gwct.org.uk/advisory/lead-ammunition/effects-of-lead-on-wildlife-and-wildfowl/

I have not personally reviewed all the evidence, but GWCT scientists have, and their conclusion and advice thus far is good enough for me. How about you?

 

I have done a quick scan of the GWCT references for the article you linked. While I haven’t had time to source and read each paper, there does appear to be at least some consensus on the impacts for grey partridge and raptors eating shot birds. I would expect some of those scholarly articles to originate from bias sources - however not all. On this basis, yes I would say it’s good enough. Thanks for the info. 

[Scully]

7 hours ago, Conor O'Gorman said:

The voluntary transition was in response to consideration of wildlife, the environment and to ensure a market for game meat in the UK and overseas; for the shooting community to maintain its place at the forefront of wildlife conservation and protection, sustainability in our practices being of utmost importance; and in response to significant developments in the quality and availability of non-lead shotgun cartridges, and that plastic cases could be recycled; and in response to the availability of biodegradable shot cups for steel shot, with the necessary ballistics to ensure lethality.

No, no, no Conor. That’s simply the party line. 
I’m away currently, hence my scant posts, and can only dip into the forum on rare occasions , but I’ll be back on the 21st and will endeavour to give the forum my full attention. 🙂

[Conor O'Gorman]

45 minutes ago, Smudger687 said:

I provided empirical evidence and mathematics on the topic of steel shot performance. You were repeatedly invited to provide contradictory evidence and you never did. It is not a difference of opinion. If you have evidence that shows steel performs as well as lead, let's hear it, better late than never I suppose. 

We all refer to the "voluntary transition" as a lead ban. Don't be a pedant, it's silly.  

My comments on biowads stem from extensive use of fibre cups in homeloads, from decomposition and field tests of market offerings, and researching the polymers used to produce them. I know that your colleagues probably tell you that steel is great and the biowads are fantastic, but last I remember you do walked up days and I can't imagine you use much steel on them. I would hazard a guess that your first hand experience of biosteels isn't particularly extensive. 

God bless you Conor. I can understand that the regular slatings you take on this forum every time steel is mentioned can make you quite defensive. I wouldn't like it either. But repeatedly ignoring everyone's objections does you no favours. You're not like this on other unrelated topics, it's very disappointing.

 

The voluntary transition is not a lead ban - it is about encouraging a voluntary move away from lead shot and single use plastics for live quarry shooting. Yes, you are doing lots of homeloading and research. Most people are buying factory loads. I am not ignoring anyone's objections. I continue to post BASC updates on lead and non-lead and pass on feedback to colleagues. 

 

[Conor O'Gorman]

41 minutes ago, Scully said:

No, no, no Conor. That’s simply the party line. 
I’m away currently, hence my scant posts, and can only dip into the forum on rare occasions , but I’ll be back on the 21st and will endeavour to give the forum my full attention. 🙂

That information is from a statement published by nine organisations. I realise that this information may be new for you but it has been out there for 4 years. On a personal note I hope you enjoy whatever you are up to away from social media!

[Conor O'Gorman]

1 hour ago, Fellside said:

I have done a quick scan of the GWCT references for the article you linked. While I haven’t had time to source and read each paper, there does appear to be at least some consensus on the impacts for grey partridge and raptors eating shot birds. I would expect some of those scholarly articles to originate from bias sources - however not all. On this basis, yes I would say it’s good enough. Thanks for the info. 

Thanks for having a look and getting back to me. The GWCT references are but the tip of the iceberg on impacts of various bird species eating lead shot as grit (the evidence goes back 100 years), but for wild greys it does concentrate the mind as regards the cost-benefits of let's say shooting a carrion crow or magpie using a lead shot cartridge over an area of brood rearing cover to reduce the risk of the partridge chicks from predation - when that shot may have eliminated the predator but has just produced a fresh minefield of lead shot on the ground for those wee partridge chicks to eat as grit and then die from.

[enfieldspares]

8 hours ago, Conor O'Gorman said:

The voluntary transition was in response to consideration of wildlife, the environment and to ensure a market for game meat in the UK and overseas

So now, finally, we have it. The sole thing that I and others both here and on another forum have been pushing for An admission that his was for the benefit of the big bag shoots.

Not for the benefit of the shoot where all the game is retained and shared. Not for the benefit of the bloke in a hide shooting woodpigeons for crop protection, not for the vermin shooter clearing out magpies for songbird protection, not for the crofter using a shotgun under the Deer Act "farmers' defence", not for the 9mm Rimfire or .22 Rimfire user with their bolt action Webley shooting rats.

But "to ensure a market for game meat in the UK and overseas". And thus everyone else goes down at a pen stroke and is thrown under the bus as collateral damage.

Edited April 12 by enfieldspares

[Old farrier]

9 minutes ago, Conor O'Gorman said:

Thanks for having a look and getting back to me. The GWCT references are but the tip of the iceberg on impacts of various bird species eating lead shot as grit (the evidence goes back 100 years), but for wild greys it does concentrate the mind as regards the cost-benefits of let's say shooting a carrion crow or magpie using a lead shot cartridge over an area of brood rearing cover to reduce the risk of the partridge chicks from predation - when that shot may have eliminated the predator but has just produced a fresh minefield of lead shot on the ground for those wee partridge chicks to eat as grit and then die from.

That’s supposition the carrion crow or magpie may not have been shot 

In fact they were probably trapped in a Larson so the problem hasn’t arisen 

are you aware of the age partridge chicks start taking grit ? To assist in the digestion of the main food they eat ( insects) 

let’s get real about this the big commercial shoots release millions of birds and they are shot for sport not for harvest of wild game the economics say you can’t hatch a egg rear it to maturity and shoot it for £1 a brace 

they don’t rear them they buy them in as chicks or poults and they don’t live long enough to die from lead poisoning 

if as you say you want to take lead out of game meat you need to stop lead bullets for deer and  probably rabbits along with lead shot 

As for wild birds there’s plenty to kill them without including lead shot in the equation 

[Konor]

8 hours ago, Conor O'Gorman said:

let's say shooting a carrion crow or magpie using a lead shot cartridge over an area of brood rearing cover to reduce the risk of the partridge chicks from predation - when that shot may have eliminated the predator but has just produced a fresh minefield of lead shot on the ground for those wee partridge chicks to eat as grit and then die from.

This emotive tabloid level of argument to support your justification of a voluntary transition away from lead shot ( the term which in itself is a double speak worthy of George Orwell or Aldous Huxley for what is in effect a lead ban despite your protests to the contrary) is an insight. 
I would suggest that the combination of your apparent willingness to concede to the opponents of fielsports on the question of the use of lead shot, your reluctance to debate on finding a compromise that both achieves a lower level of lead use where doing so would have measurable benefit to the environment while also ensuring the retention of the option to use lead through our vintage guns in some sporting situations , your continual insistence that forum members have little or no background knowledge of the issues surrounding the use of lead shot and its proposed restriction and your frankly wild accusations of conspiracy theories from the people you purport to represent makes me question whether you personally and BASC by extension are really best suited to effectively defending shooters best interests .

We need strong leadership in what has become a very polarised society where a significant percentage of shooting opponents see field sports and those that take part in them as sadistic in nature and morally corrupt. There will be no appeasing them with minor concessions , they require the complete abolition of all field sports.

Rather than “ find common ground “ with our opponents in this case we need to be projecting a realistic portrayal of fieldsports and it’s  place in the rural community.Your contribution to that goal ,your inconsistent argument as witnessed in this thread and your apparent inability to acknowledge and debate the issues raised by fellow sportsmen  is both worrying and disappointing. 
I would imagine our opponents idea of compromise regarding the continuation of fieldports would involve a set limited time in the day ( 4 hours for example)where we would be permitted to go out into the field to follow our pursuits and schooling and social media would echo the message of the corrupt nature of those doing so. Perhaps bear that possible scenario in mind before considering any anthropomorphic emotive argument that supports our opponents position.  

Edited April 13 by Konor

[Konor]

20 hours ago, grahamch said:

At the end of the day the HSE will impose some sorts of controls on lead shot, like it or not. 
A bit defeatist in my opinion and easy acceptance only emboldens our opponents

It's high time folk accepted that and adapted their shooting habits and stopped factionalising the shooting community. 
This brings to mind a playground situation where a bully is knocking seven bells out of someone and a kid in the background is saying “ why can’t we all just get along” Because occasionally the right thing to do is fight back

We face far bigger threats if the Starmer **** and his lefty pals get into power 

Why can’t we just leave politics out of it surely the most divisive of topics if we really want to reduce factionalising in shooting

 

 

 

[Gordon R]

Quote

a fresh minefield of lead shot on the ground for those wee partridge chicks to eat as grit and then die from.

Right up there with:-

"There must be another way."

"Think of the children."

Comedy gold passing as serious debate. 🙂

[Konor]

1 minute ago, Gordon R said:

Right up there with:-

"There must be another way."

"Think of the children."

Comedy gold passing as serious debate. 🙂

It might be some special ammunition BASC has discovered was being trialled by those nasty lead ammunition people “exploding shot”😂

[wymberley]

A valid reason often given for mod's closing threads is that it's going around in circles/nowhere. Doesn't this one qualify as such?