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

[Conor O'Gorman]

9 minutes ago, Smudger687 said:

I've used a bit of factory bismuth too - I've not been particularly thrilled with current market offerings, the shot quality is quite poor from my experience. Are your steel cartridges biosteels or plaswads?

The last time I used steel cartridges on pigeon it was plaswads. I don't have any steel cartridges left.

5 minutes ago, Konor said:

Has the deposition of lead in vast amounts over comparatively small areas not given rise to that research or would you have me believe that statistically a case could be made for significant harm resulting from the deposition of lead shot in small amounts over a large area of ground ?

I don't think so as regards the research. As regards the chances of birds picking up lead shot as grit I guess that will vary with amount of shooting and type of ground. I don't think this is something that has been researched in the UK - possibly overseas. I think shot density has been research in wetlands in the UK.

[Konor]

15 minutes ago, Konor said:

You seem to avoid mentioning large commercial shoots ,is that deliberate and if so why ?

No answer ?

15 minutes ago, Konor said:

would you have me believe that statistically a case could be made for significant harm resulting from the deposition of lead shot in small amounts over a large area of ground ?
 

No answer ?

Not quite the full answers I expected and not really debating the issues I have raised but perhaps it is the best you can do.

The question remains do we expect more from our national organisations in the fight against an imposed ban on all lead shot  over non wetlands and are they capable of providing it. The true voice of shooting ie those who participate in fieldsports will decide. I know what I have concluded from this and other similar threads.

Edited April 13 by Konor

[Krico woodcock]

51 minutes ago, Konor said:

I read about the grey partridge project at Boora on the Offaly libraries site.

The blame for the partridge decline was put on intensive agriculture and the removal of hedgerows and the reversal of the birds fortunes due to ensuring the best possible conditions for the survival of the grey partridges at Boora. Methods involved nesting strips ,crop cover strips and growing crops like barley to help the birds thrive. The grey partridge population in Offaly is made up of wild breeding birds supplemented by a captive breeding programme.

Similar work has been carried out by the Game Conservancy Trust in both England and Scotland to turn around grey partridge population numbers.

In both cases I can find no reference or mention of lead minefields being overcome to achieve their results .

An old Game Conservancy quote stated “ It was the recreational shooter who first alerted the government to the demise of the grey partridge”

Rather than concede ground to the self promoting new breed of politically correct/woke conservationists we should be acknowledging the decades of work carried out by and on behalf of fieldsports enthusiasts

Correct konor.. and also the NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF REGIONAL GAME COUNCILS  (NARGC)has done and still does huge work on grey partridge projects.. and it was them that advised to take grey partridge of quarry list year's ago.  Intensive farming and everything that goes along with it,from the 50's with the use of DDT sprays was the start of the demise of grey partridge. DEFINITELY NOT LEAD PELLETS.  

Edited April 13 by Krico woodcock

[Fellside]

6 minutes ago, Krico woodcock said:

Correct konor.. and also the NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF REGIONAL GAME COUNCILS  (NARGC)has done and still does huge work on grey partridge projects.. and it was them that advised to take grey partridge of quarry list year's ago.  Intensive farming and everything that goes along with it,from the 50's with the use of DDT sprays was the start of the demise of grey partridge. DEFINITELY NOT LEAD PELLETS.  

Yes - post war agricultural intensification  is the well known cause of grey partridge decline. This has been extensively documented. DDT played its part also. In fact, this period marked the beginning for the decline of many common farmland bird species. However, I think it is important to acknowledge, from recent research, that lead shot litter could play an important part in limiting the breeding success of remaining coveys. This isn’t to say it’s the only factor, but contributory. The lead poisoning does not have to be lethal to have an important adverse effect. 

Just to be clear I do not (DO NOT) support any restrictions on lead shot. I might however think again if I was lucky enough to have a few coveys around. I think it should be a choice. In some circumstances perhaps steel may be appropriate. 

[Gordon R]

I am at a loss as to why Conor O'Gorman carries on posting. Never answers a straight question, but posts an irrelevant link or enquires about the poster's shooting, as if that is in some way relevant.

Initially, I found his posts amusing, almost like a devious politician from "Yes Minister", but have become embarrassed by their childlike content.

Rewulf, Scully, Konor and others have made valid points and raised valid questions. BASC's answer - put Conor in to bat - that will fox them.

[Old farrier]

To make this voluntary transition easier for its members is there an option of a buy back scheme ?

or maybe a one for one swap plastic wad or lead cartridges for non lead bio wad cartridges ? 

[Konor]

37 minutes ago, Fellside said:

In some circumstances perhaps steel may be appropriate. 

I agree and it would be little hardship to have a gun for that purpose while still having the opportunity to use vintage guns under circumstances where the deposition of lead shot would have insignificant consequences to the environment. Unfortunately that choice does not seem to be considered/debated as a possible solution. Why not ??

[Conor O'Gorman]

1 hour ago, Konor said:

No answer ?

No answer ?

Not quite the full answers I expected and not really debating the issues I have raised but perhaps it is the best you can do.

The question remains do we expect more from our national organisations in the fight against an imposed ban on all lead shot  over non wetlands and are they capable of providing it. The true voice of shooting ie those who participate in fieldsports will decide. I know what I have concluded from this and other similar threads.

I have answered your questions. They may not be the answers you are after and that is something perhaps to reflect on before incorrectly stating you have had no answers. If its a debate you are after you can always phone me, but you choose not to. You perhaps would not be so unpleasant to me on the phone or face to face as you are from the comfort of your keyboard in anonymity. I think the tone and content of your recent comments is perhaps below the high standards you expect of others. You might reflect on that also.

And around in circles we will go. You would be better putting a question to the AGM if you wish to challenge BASC's policy on lead ammunition - as that's a matter for BASC Council and its elected members.  Would you be willing to do that?

[Krico woodcock]

47 minutes ago, Fellside said:

Yes - post war agricultural intensification  is the well known cause of grey partridge decline. This has been extensively documented. DDT played its part also. In fact, this period marked the beginning for the decline of many common farmland bird species. However, I think it is important to acknowledge, from recent research, that lead shot litter could play an important part in limiting the breeding success of remaining coveys. This isn’t to say it’s the only factor, but contributory. The lead poisoning does not have to be lethal to have an important adverse effect. 

Just to be clear I do not (DO NOT) support any restrictions on lead shot. I might however think again if I was lucky enough to have a few coveys around. I think it should be a choice. In some circumstances perhaps steel may be appropriate. 

The amount of lead shot litter back them days and even today in rural Ireland would be next to no risk, well compared to England the amount of shots fired, it would only be a pin in the ocean.. so chances of a partridge picking up lead pellet as grit would be near zero, compared to them picking up chemical fertilizers we call" bag stuff "  eg 18_6-12 small pellet sized fertilizer they definitely would and definitely did pick and got poisoned one way or another from it. Along with all the major intense agricultural practices habitat destruction etc ..destroyed grey  partridge populations. 

[Gordon R]

Quote

I have answered your questions. They may not be the answers you are after and that is something perhaps to reflect on before incorrectly stating you have had no answers. If its a debate you are after you can always phone me, but you choose not to. You perhaps would not be so unpleasant to me on the phone or face to face as you are from the comfort of your keyboard in anonymity. I think the tone and content of your recent comments is perhaps below the high standards you expect of others. You might reflect on that also.

I rest my case. Not fit for purpose.

[Old farrier]

8 minutes ago, Conor O'Gorman said:

I have answered your questions. They may not be the answers you are after and that is something perhaps to reflect on before incorrectly stating you have had no answers. If its a debate you are after you can always phone me, but you choose not to. You perhaps would not be so unpleasant to me on the phone or face to face as you are from the comfort of your keyboard in anonymity. I think the tone and content of your recent comments is perhaps below the high standards you expect of others. You might reflect on that also.

And around in circles we will go. You would be better putting a question to the AGM if you wish to challenge BASC's policy on lead ammunition - as that's a matter for BASC Council and its elected members.  Would you be willing to do that?

Err 🤔

your a representative of a major organisation posting information on a public forum member’s expectations are that you are professional in your replies 

as for the public on the forum many of the members don’t have degrees or university education so in my opinion you should be able to answer the questions of the uneducated public 

 

[Conor O'Gorman]

4 hours ago, enfieldspares said:

Please don't seek to be insulting. Remember that it is BASC members whose subscriptions pay you wages and such boorish behaviour from someone employed by them when representing the BASC case to others is out if place. 

I have used bismuth and tried it some twenty years ago. Indeed when I used it if it had been the same price as lead I woud have used it preference to lead as I found it to pattern better and kill better.

I have also used Hull Game Flight tin shot. In 12 bore English size Se3 just the last season gone. The breasts meat of pheasants shot by it was very badly bruised and would have been rejected, I feel, by the customer buying pre-packaged dressed game.

What I have not tried and neither has anyone else is non-lead 9mm Rimfire or .22 Rimfire shot cartridges as they do not exist. Four years after the February 2020 statement. So in my view they have been thrown under the bus.

I have also not tried affordable non-lead .410 cartridges. As again these do not exist. But given that BASC did not consult with the cartridge loading businesses in the UK that is not surprising. 

And finally as I have always asked what is the difference between lead shot pheasant with a shotgun and lead shot deer with a rifle as far as the logic of "ensuring a market for game meat in the UK and overseas".

 

You have reacted to the posting of the joint statement text from 4 years ago on the voluntary transition away from lead shot for live quarry shooting as: "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." 

So, I ask again, was this the first time you have read the joint statement? Asking a question is neither insulting nor boorish behaviour. Would you agree on reflection? 

You have asked "what is the difference between lead shot pheasant with a shotgun and lead shot deer with a rifle as far as the logic of "ensuring a market for game meat in the UK and overseas".

The difference is that the joint statement text on a voluntary transition away from lead shot for live quarry shooting is for lead shot and not rifle ammunition. That is the context for the statement. 

[Konor]

46 minutes ago, Conor O'Gorman said:

I have answered your questions. They may not be the answers you are after and that is something perhaps to reflect on before incorrectly stating you have had no answers. If its a debate you are after you can always phone me, but you choose not to. You perhaps would not be so unpleasant to me on the phone or face to face as you are from the comfort of your keyboard in anonymity. I think the tone and content of your recent comments is perhaps below the high standards you expect of others. You might reflect on that also.

And around in circles we will go. You would be better putting a question to the AGM if you wish to challenge BASC's policy on lead ammunition - as that's a matter for BASC Council and its elected members.  Would you be willing to do that?

So no answers then to the specific questions I asked. Your definition of a full answer falls short of mine Conor.No disappointment though on my part as I did not expect you to confront the issues surrounding commercial shooting. 
I had no inkling that you considered my raising points regarding your ( BASCs and so by extension your)approach to the handling of the lead shot fiasco was deemed to be unpleasant to you on a personal level. I was merely questioning why a more imaginative resolution to the perceived problem of lead shot in the environment could not be found.Do you therefore think that there are limitations to achieving that and what do you consider those limitations to be ?Incidentally you will need a thicker skin if you are to deal with some of the extremists on the anti-fieldsports side if you consider our interaction to be unpleasant.

To conclude , the nature of this discussion is not a means for me to be unpleasant to you ,it is an attempt to understand why the issues surrounding lead shot deposition are not being dealt with in a more constructive manner. Your failure to address my concerns may indicate the answer or at least part of it.

 

Edited April 13 by Konor

[Conor O'Gorman]

18 minutes ago, Konor said:

So no answers then to the specific questions I asked. Your definition of a full answer falls short of mine Conor.No disappointment though on my part as I did not expect you to confront the issues surrounding commercial shooting. 
I had no inkling that you considered my raising points regarding your approach to the handling of the lead shot fiasco was deemed to be unpleasant to you on a personal level. I was merely questioning why a more imaginative resolution to the perceived problem of lead shot in the environment could not be found.
Do you think that there are limitations to achieving that and what do you consider those limitations to be ?You will need a thicker skin if you are to deal with some of the extremists on the anti-fieldsports side.

To conclude , the nature of this discussion is not a means for me to be unpleasant to you ,it is an attempt to understand why the issues surrounding lead shot deposition are not being dealt with in a more constructive manner. Your failure to address my concerns may indicate the answer or at least part of it.

 

Amongst all that, you have asked another question: "Do you think that there are limitations to achieving that and what do you consider those limitations to be?" I don't understand the question. Limitations to achieving what? Can you please clarify your question?

 

[Konor]

11 minutes ago, Conor O'Gorman said:

Amongst all that, you have asked another question: "Do you think that there are limitations to achieving that and what do you consider those limitations to be?" I don't understand the question. Limitations to achieving what? Can you please clarify your question?

 

Perhaps if you read the sentence immediately before the question it will be clearer.

[enfieldspares]

54 minutes ago, Conor O'Gorman said:

You have asked "what is the difference between lead shot pheasant with a shotgun and lead shot deer with a rifle as far as the logic of "ensuring a market for game meat in the UK and overseas".

The difference is that the joint statement text on a voluntary transition away from lead shot for live quarry shooting is for lead shot and not rifle ammunition. That is the context for the statement. 

The original statement was worded not the same. Was it. Only a few words of difference but enough to skew the context to imply something else.

The original:

In consideration of wildlife, the environment, and to ensure a market for the healthiest game products, at home and abroad

Which is now:

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

And either lead is safe in the flesh of shot meat or it is not. If it is unsafe in pheasant and partridge breast it is also unsafe in venison shoulder. In fact given the fact that it is liely to be tiny fragments rather that whole round pellets more so.

Edited April 13 by enfieldspares

[Konor]

1 hour ago, Conor O'Gorman said:

2 hours ago, Konor said:

I have answered your questions. They may not be the answers you are after

Shades of Eric and Ernie meeting Andre Previn “They are the correct notes maybe just not in the correct order” If BASC doesn’t work out perhaps an opportunity in stand up beckons. Just joking Conor you’re doing a great job but seriously is it in the best interests of us or the opposition ,shades of John Swift showing right enough but then he did quite well despite everything. Your minefield of lead shot for the wee partridge chicks is a quote I will never tire of.😂Thank you 👍

[Konor]

1 hour ago, Conor O'Gorman said:

You have asked "what is the difference between lead shot pheasant with a shotgun and lead shot deer with a rifle 

If both wounded I’d say the lead shot deer with a rifle is probably more dangerous

[Fellside]

1 hour ago, Krico woodcock said:

The amount of lead shot litter back them days and even today in rural Ireland would be next to no risk, well compared to England the amount of shots fired, it would only be a pin in the ocean.. so chances of a partridge picking up lead pellet as grit would be near zero, compared to them picking up chemical fertilizers we call" bag stuff "  eg 18_6-12 small pellet sized fertilizer they definitely would and definitely did pick and got poisoned one way or another from it. Along with all the major intense agricultural practices habitat destruction etc ..destroyed grey  partridge populations. 

Yes I see what you mean - perhaps not a major issue in Ireland. 

[Conor O'Gorman]

1 hour ago, enfieldspares said:

The original statement was worded not the same. Was it. Only a few words of difference but enough to skew the context to imply something else.

The original:

In consideration of wildlife, the environment, and to ensure a market for the healthiest game products, at home and abroad

Which is now:

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

And either lead is safe in the flesh of shot meat or it is not. If it is unsafe in pheasant and partridge breast it is also unsafe in venison shoulder. In fact given the fact that it is liely to be tiny fragments rather that whole round pellets more so.

The joint position is the same as it was in 2020, it has not changed. To be clear here is the link:

https://www.gwct.org.uk/news/news/2020/february/a-joint-statement-on-the-future-of-shotgun-ammunition-for-live-quarry-shooting/

And the full text is copy and pasted as follows:

In consideration of wildlife, the environment and to ensure a market for the healthiest game products, at home and abroad, we wish to see an end to both lead and single-use plastics in ammunition used by those taking all live quarry with shotguns within five years. The shooting community must maintain its place at the forefront of wildlife conservation and protection. Sustainability in our practices is of utmost importance.

Many years ago, wetland restrictions demanded a move away from lead shot and we believe it is necessary to begin a further phased transition. Recently, there have been significant developments in the quality and availability of non-lead shotgun cartridges, and plastic cases can now be recycled. For the first time, biodegradable shot cups for steel shot, with the necessary ballistics to ensure lethality, are available. These welcome advances are continuing at an ever-quickening pace, in response to demand from a changing market. Such advances mean that, over the coming years, a complete transition is achievable.

We are jointly calling for our members to engage in this transition and work with us, the Gun Trade Association and the cartridge manufacturers to ensure that further viable alternatives are developed for every situation involving live quarry. This is an opportunity to take the initiative and ensure the reputation of the shooting community, as custodians of the countryside, is both maintained and enhanced.

2 hours ago, Konor said:

Perhaps if you read the sentence immediately before the question it will be clearer.

So what you are actually saying is: "I was merely questioning why a more imaginative resolution to the perceived problem of lead shot in the environment could not be found".

What do you mean by perceived problem? Perceived by whom?

[Old farrier]

Ok one last question 

even though you seem to have missed every one so far 

at the end of the voluntary 5 year period if the game shooting / live quarry shooters decide they don’t want to change 

what then happens ?

[Konor]

58 minutes ago, Conor O'Gorman said:

What do you mean by perceived problem

Perceived problem because I would maintain that in some areas being shot over the deposition of lead shot on the ground would be so small that it’s effect would not be measurable and probably of no consequence but the perception given by a blanket lead shot band would seem to indicate that lead deposition would be a significant environmental problem no matter where it occurred or the level of shooting involved.

Conor I’m beginning to question the point of engaging with you. You seem to feign not understanding the question asked or ignore them altogether. It may work in politics but I think it is becoming obvious that your responding posts mimic a willingness to interact but the truth may lie closer to the fact that you have little to contribute. Perhaps in light of this you should reconsider how you interact with members on the forum and either step up to answer genuine concerns honestly to move the debate on or step out rather than continue going round in circles as you are the only poster doing so.

[Conor O'Gorman]

5 minutes ago, Old farrier said:

Ok one last question 

even though you seem to have missed every one so far 

at the end of the voluntary 5 year period if the game shooting / live quarry shooters decide they don’t want to change 

what then happens ?

What happens from 2025 onwards will be for the organisations that announced the voluntary transition away from lead shot and single use plastics for live quarry shooting with shotguns in 2020 to decide and announce.

[oowee]

7 minutes ago, Old farrier said:

Ok one last question 

even though you seem to have missed every one so far 

at the end of the voluntary 5 year period if the game shooting / live quarry shooters decide they don’t want to change 

what then happens ?

I guess it's carry on until the legislation is brought to ban either lead, plastic or both. This gradual tightening of control and protection of the environment is happening across the board. We have to start somewhere.  

[Konor]

4 hours ago, Konor said:

I was merely questioning why a more imaginative resolution to the perceived problem of lead shot in the environment could not be found.Do you therefore think that there are limitations to achieving that and what do you consider those limitations to be ?

4 hours ago, Conor O'Gorman said:

I don't understand the question

 

Do you understand the question now ?