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

[holloway]

1 hour ago, Konor said:

Holloway I respect your opinion. However as there has been no firm decision on how this issue will play out I think that is only right that I put forward my point of view in the hope that it will encourage a move away from the all or nothing stance prevailing and perhaps encourage a more imaginative approach to the problem. 

 

1 hour ago, Konor said:

Holloway I respect your opinion. However as there has been no firm decision on how this issue will play out I think that is only right that I put forward my point of view in the hope that it will encourage a move away from the all or nothing stance prevailing and perhaps encourage a more imaginative approach to the problem. 

Fair enough 👍

[Konor]

2 minutes ago, holloway said:

 

Fair enough 👍

👍

[Conor O'Gorman]

54 minutes ago, Gordon R said:

Connor O'Gorman. Perhaps you could look back through your posts to check how many times you have patronised posters, suggesting that they re-read answers which aren't there. Then you accuse Konor of disrespecting you. It's a bit rich.

Thanks, I will do so.

Do you think it is disrespectful to refer a fellow member as naiive and fragile and to grow big boy pants? A yes or no answer would be fine.

It is interesting that when someone asked some straightforward questions about the voluntary transition etc earlier in this thread your answer to them was:

On 14/04/2024 at 17:16, Gordon R said:

Can I suggest you take the time to read the posts.

Why didn't you just answer the questions from a fellow member given how much you have posted on lead ammo threads? 

Two hours passed with no help from yourself or Konor who were commenting on the thread that evening and I then answered the questions to the satisfaction of the member.

 

[Rewulf]

1 minute ago, Conor O'Gorman said:

Do you think it is disrespectful to refer a fellow member as naiive and fragile and to grow big boy pants? A yes or no answer would be fine.

Do you think its disrespectful to to call a fellow member an 'anti shooting troll, who spreads disinformation' 
A yes or no answer would be fine 😄

[Gordon R]

Quote

Why didn't you just answer the questions from a fellow member given how much you have posted on lead ammo threads? 

Conor O'Gorman - Perhaps I was following your lead in never answering any "difficult" questions. Your track record consists of evading straight questions, directing posters to read irrelevant links or asking people to consider their behaviour. Other options seem to consist of an email or useful phone call. I cannot accept that you have genuinely tried to debate.

You may well be a very nice person and well intentioned, but your contributions do you little credit.

I too will leave the debate, as there seems little point in going around in circles. Perish the thought that you would like the thread closed.

[Conor O'Gorman]

16 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

Do you think its disrespectful to to call a fellow member an 'anti shooting troll, who spreads disinformation' 
A yes or no answer would be fine 😄

Yes.

2 minutes ago, Gordon R said:

Conor O'Gorman - Perhaps I was following your lead in never answering any "difficult" questions. Your track record consists of evading straight questions, directing posters to read irrelevant links or asking people to consider their behaviour. Other options seem to consist of an email or useful phone call. I cannot accept that you have genuinely tried to debate.

You may well be a very nice person and well intentioned, but your contributions do you little credit.

I too will leave the debate, as there seems little point in going around in circles. Perish the thought that you would like the thread closed.

So are you saying it is my fault that you didn't answer a straight forward set of questions from a fellow member? Would it not be better to take personal responsibility for it? Why didn't you just answer the questions?

[Rewulf]

3 minutes ago, Conor O'Gorman said:

Yes.

'unfortunately that is the intention of some (not all) of the ex-BASC members with various real or perceived axes to grind from the past posting in this thread. It is divisive and hateful stuff and very wrong in my book at the very time when we all need to get behind all the shooting organisations. However, there are some BASC members posting in this thread challenging the antis (and let's be clear - some of the trolls may shoot but they are antis nonetheless in what they are doing) '

Yet you thought this was OK?
And all because I questioned the BASC stance on lead.
Oh and asked about the fighting fund, which appeared to be a VERY touchy subject 😄

I also posted this , which you never countered or commented on, but in my mind was an extraordinary confliction on what BASC said then , and what they are saying now.

This press release from last year (2022) demonstrates the wishful thinking that BASC has been using since it announced its 'phase out'

https://basc.org.uk/basc-response-to-uk-reach-lead-ammunition-consultation/

This section is the killer blow.
 

'There is clear evidence of risk of primary poisoning of birds from lead shot and of the human health risk from exposure to lead in game meat.

Having assessed the evidence, we concluded that restrictions on the sale and use of both lead shot and expanding lead rifle ammunition for live quarry shooting would be effective at eliminating those proven risks.'

They have agreed 'lead is bad' and the die is cast , yet seem to think that 'some' lead can still be used ?

'To support our position, we have submitted a series of technical reports. These demonstrate the need for raising the threshold of ‘small calibres’ within the UK REACH dossier to include any calibre below 6.5mm. This would provide a longer transition period for calibres such as .243. '

'We maintain our view that airgun ammunition should not be restricted as the risk to human health can be managed through existing sector guidance on game meat handling. We have also prepared a technical report demonstrating the inherent unsuitability of existing lead-free airgun ammunition for live quarry shooting.'

Apparently clay pigeon shooters should be OK with lead though !!

 

Clay pigeon and target shooting

'The evidence presented by the HSE on secondary exposure to birds, plus lead exposure pathways to livestock and other animals, soil, soil organisms, plants, and surface waters, is not conclusive.'

Really ? I thought it was ?

'BASC believes that lead shot could continue to be used for clay pigeon / target shooting at venues where risks of primary exposure to birds is managed. We also advocate that lead rifle ammunition (non-expanding) can continue to be used on ranges. We believe that current legal and regulatory frameworks are effective and further regulation risks the unnecessary ‘gold plating’ of environmental directives.'

Confused? Yeah me too .
How do you 'manage' lead shot fallout on clay grounds ?

[Konor]

4 hours ago, Conor O'Gorman said:

Why didn't you just answer the questions from a fellow member 

Hahaha, the irony 

4 hours ago, Conor O'Gorman said:

So are you saying it is my fault that you didn't answer a straight forward set of questions from a fellow member? Would it not be better to take personal responsibility for it? Why didn't you just answer the questions?

It could almost be me writing, absolutely priceless

[Konor]

4 hours ago, Conor O'Gorman said:

 

Do you think it is disrespectful to refer a fellow member as naiive and fragile and to grow big boy pants? A yes or no answer would be fine

To put on your big boy pants, a comical reference to put into perspective your feigned upset used to deviate from not addressing the topics raised in a thread you started. I couldn't resist commenting but that's me really out now 😂

[Conor O'Gorman]

5 hours ago, Rewulf said:

'unfortunately that is the intention of some (not all) of the ex-BASC members with various real or perceived axes to grind from the past posting in this thread. It is divisive and hateful stuff and very wrong in my book at the very time when we all need to get behind all the shooting organisations. However, there are some BASC members posting in this thread challenging the antis (and let's be clear - some of the trolls may shoot but they are antis nonetheless in what they are doing) '

Yet you thought this was OK?
And all because I questioned the BASC stance on lead.
Oh and asked about the fighting fund, which appeared to be a VERY touchy subject 😄

I also posted this , which you never countered or commented on, but in my mind was an extraordinary confliction on what BASC said then , and what they are saying now.

This press release from last year (2022) demonstrates the wishful thinking that BASC has been using since it announced its 'phase out'

https://basc.org.uk/basc-response-to-uk-reach-lead-ammunition-consultation/

This section is the killer blow.
 

'There is clear evidence of risk of primary poisoning of birds from lead shot and of the human health risk from exposure to lead in game meat.

Having assessed the evidence, we concluded that restrictions on the sale and use of both lead shot and expanding lead rifle ammunition for live quarry shooting would be effective at eliminating those proven risks.'

They have agreed 'lead is bad' and the die is cast , yet seem to think that 'some' lead can still be used ?

'To support our position, we have submitted a series of technical reports. These demonstrate the need for raising the threshold of ‘small calibres’ within the UK REACH dossier to include any calibre below 6.5mm. This would provide a longer transition period for calibres such as .243. '

'We maintain our view that airgun ammunition should not be restricted as the risk to human health can be managed through existing sector guidance on game meat handling. We have also prepared a technical report demonstrating the inherent unsuitability of existing lead-free airgun ammunition for live quarry shooting.'

Apparently clay pigeon shooters should be OK with lead though !!

 

Clay pigeon and target shooting

'The evidence presented by the HSE on secondary exposure to birds, plus lead exposure pathways to livestock and other animals, soil, soil organisms, plants, and surface waters, is not conclusive.'

Really ? I thought it was ?

'BASC believes that lead shot could continue to be used for clay pigeon / target shooting at venues where risks of primary exposure to birds is managed. We also advocate that lead rifle ammunition (non-expanding) can continue to be used on ranges. We believe that current legal and regulatory frameworks are effective and further regulation risks the unnecessary ‘gold plating’ of environmental directives.'

Confused? Yeah me too .
How do you 'manage' lead shot fallout on clay grounds ?

I answered your question and you come back with all sorts of stuff and a heap of questions. We have been down this path before and its endless. So let's take it one step at a time. The issue is the personal comments made by Konor and my request to Konor to assure me that he/she would refrain from further personal comments about me. Konor could not do that so conversation closed with him/her. Then GordonR could not answer my question on whether he/she thinks it would be disrespectful to refer a fellow member as naiive and fragile and to grow big boy pants. 

So, let's ask you the same question and see where that takes us - do you think it is disrespectful to refer a fellow member as naiive and fragile and to grow big boy pants? A yes or no answer would be fine.

[Rewulf]

2 minutes ago, Conor O'Gorman said:

So, let's ask you the same question and see where that takes us - do you think it is disrespectful to refer a fellow member as naiive and fragile and to grow big boy pants? A yes or no answer would be fine

I would imagine that it depends on how naive and fragile you were feeling , and whether you really did need some big boy pants ?

Generally speaking , we are big strong men, who go out into the wild and shoot things with guns, so no , I wouldn't think it disrespectful. 

You are of course entitled to your own views , it doesn't necessarily mean we have to adhere to them.

[Conor O'Gorman]

9 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

I would imagine that it depends on how naive and fragile you were feeling , and whether you really did need some big boy pants ?

Generally speaking , we are big strong men, who go out into the wild and shoot things with guns, so no , I wouldn't think it disrespectful. 

You are of course entitled to your own views , it doesn't necessarily mean we have to adhere to them.

Thank you for clarifying. The next time you start complaining and playing the victim for the gallery about my comments I will remind you of this.

[Sweet11-87]

perhaps if people just asked square honest questions you'd get square honest answers that would benefit all.

loading the questions,sledging,baiting and back handed insults is getting nothing resolved for any of you and its burying any question, answers or information of value.

cheers lads

 

[Rewulf]

2 hours ago, Conor O'Gorman said:

Thank you for clarifying. The next time you start complaining and playing the victim for the gallery about my comments I will remind you of this.

And next time you are asked a straightforward question,  perhaps you might consider answering it, without resorting to evasion and err, disrespectful comments , while playing victim to the gallery ?

 

[Gordon R]

🙂

[Konor]

2 hours ago, Rewulf said:

And next time you are asked a straightforward question,  perhaps you might consider answering it, without resorting to evasion and err, disrespectful comments , while playing victim to the gallery ?

 

👍

[Conor O'Gorman]

On 19/04/2024 at 19:59, Old farrier said:

Could you be kind enough to enlighten us 

to 

what specific birds are ingesting it 

who conducted the research and a baseline on it would be useful information 

what size shot ?

sub lethal impact? If you mean wounded or pricked birds that happens with any medium if you mean lead poisoning say so 

I appreciate no data can be accurate or useful in the last few years since the onset of bird flu and the number of deaths caused by it 

The 2023 HSE background document contains all the relevant information - various seed eating bird species and the grit/shot sizes. How lead shot is metabolised etc. It's a heavy read (373 pages) but fairly comprehensive and with lots of references you can then follow-up on and find online.

https://consultations.hse.gov.uk/crd-reach/lead-in-ammunition/supporting_documents/Lead in Ammunition Background Document Draft SEA.pdf 

See also: https://echa.europa.eu/hot-topics/lead-in-shot-bullets-and-fishing-weights for the EU equivalent research and background docs.

[Gordon R]

Quote

 

Could you be kind enough to enlighten us 

to 

what specific birds are ingesting it 

 

Old farrier - the cited links doesn't give that information. It references some species, but lacks the promised detail.

[Conor O'Gorman]

21 hours ago, Rewulf said:

And next time you are asked a straightforward question,  perhaps you might consider answering it, without resorting to evasion and err, disrespectful comments , while playing victim to the gallery ?

 

When I receive straightforward questions I answer them. 

On 20/04/2024 at 13:30, Rewulf said:

'unfortunately that is the intention of some (not all) of the ex-BASC members with various real or perceived axes to grind from the past posting in this thread. It is divisive and hateful stuff and very wrong in my book at the very time when we all need to get behind all the shooting organisations. However, there are some BASC members posting in this thread challenging the antis (and let's be clear - some of the trolls may shoot but they are antis nonetheless in what they are doing) '

Yet you thought this was OK?

Please post a link to the thread for full context as I was unable to find it.

[Conor O'Gorman]

4 hours ago, Gordon R said:

Old farrier - the cited links doesn't give that information. It references some species, but lacks the promised detail.

You might let Old Farrier make his own judgement. Why do you feel the need to intervene?

On 20/04/2024 at 13:30, Rewulf said:

I also posted this , which you never countered or commented on, but in my mind was an extraordinary confliction on what BASC said then , and what they are saying now.

This press release from last year (2022) demonstrates the wishful thinking that BASC has been using since it announced its 'phase out'

https://basc.org.uk/basc-response-to-uk-reach-lead-ammunition-consultation/

This section is the killer blow.
 

'There is clear evidence of risk of primary poisoning of birds from lead shot and of the human health risk from exposure to lead in game meat.

Having assessed the evidence, we concluded that restrictions on the sale and use of both lead shot and expanding lead rifle ammunition for live quarry shooting would be effective at eliminating those proven risks.'

They have agreed 'lead is bad' and the die is cast , yet seem to think that 'some' lead can still be used ?

'To support our position, we have submitted a series of technical reports. These demonstrate the need for raising the threshold of ‘small calibres’ within the UK REACH dossier to include any calibre below 6.5mm. This would provide a longer transition period for calibres such as .243. '

'We maintain our view that airgun ammunition should not be restricted as the risk to human health can be managed through existing sector guidance on game meat handling. We have also prepared a technical report demonstrating the inherent unsuitability of existing lead-free airgun ammunition for live quarry shooting.'

Apparently clay pigeon shooters should be OK with lead though !!

 

Clay pigeon and target shooting

'The evidence presented by the HSE on secondary exposure to birds, plus lead exposure pathways to livestock and other animals, soil, soil organisms, plants, and surface waters, is not conclusive.'

Really ? I thought it was ?

'BASC believes that lead shot could continue to be used for clay pigeon / target shooting at venues where risks of primary exposure to birds is managed. We also advocate that lead rifle ammunition (non-expanding) can continue to be used on ranges. We believe that current legal and regulatory frameworks are effective and further regulation risks the unnecessary ‘gold plating’ of environmental directives.'

Confused? Yeah me too .
How do you 'manage' lead shot fallout on clay grounds ?

I think you may be copy and pasting text from another thread. Please could you provide a link to the thread for full context?

[Konor]

1 hour ago, Conor O'Gorman said:

When I receive straightforward questions I answer them. 

Not true as can be witnessed by reading through this thread. Stating this is being more than economical with the truth.

On 19/04/2024 at 20:50, Konor said:

The scale of that threat is greater on commercial shooting estates which rely on their financial survival on large bags of game birds (£60 per bird )If commercial shoots are responsible for the vast majority of lead shot pollution then surely they should be responsible for rectifying the matter. Why are BASC et al not holding them to account for the degree of lead pollution they are responsible for?

 

[Rewulf]

36 minutes ago, Conor O'Gorman said:

You might let Old Farrier make his own judgement. Why do you feel the need to intervene?

I think you may be copy and pasting text from another thread. Please could you provide a link to the thread for full context?

Yes, it's the one entitled 'Do you trust BASC '

The one where you flatly refused to answer any questions.

It should be compulsory reading at Marford Mill.

[Konor]

On 19/04/2024 at 21:57, Konor said:

On 19/04/2024 at 21:00, Conor O'Gorman said:

The evidence does not warrant a ban on the use of lead shot.

If the evidence does not warrant a ban on the use of lead shot I can only conclude that the evidence has been greatly exaggerated by those who seek to bring about a lead shot ban or the same organisations/academics consider that a lesser degree of harm justifies a total lead shot ban. When will BASC et al start to counter these exaggerated claims and if necessary highlight where the risks of harm to the environment is greatest and accept that volunteering to tackle the problem where it’s affects are greatest is the responsible way forward to tackling the problem 

You have a verifiable history of not answering straight forward questions to state otherwise is not only untrue but a weak attempt at deception. If you read back through this thread you will see many examples of you not answering straight forward questions. This post and my last give two examples within the last couple of pages where you have failed to answer a straightforward question.

Edited April 21 by Konor

[Conor O'Gorman]

10 minutes ago, Konor said:

Not true as can be witnessed by reading through this thread. Stating this is being more than economical with the truth.

The truth is:

On 20/04/2024 at 11:46, Konor said:

I'm out. 

9 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

Yes, it's the one entitled 'Do you trust BASC '

The one where you flatly refused to answer any questions.

It should be compulsory reading at Marford Mill.

Please provide a link to the thread, as originally requested.

[Rewulf]

9 minutes ago, Conor O'Gorman said:

The truth is:

Please provide a link to the thread, as originally requested.

🤣😂 Don't you believe me (again) Conor ? Do you think I'd just make it up?

https://forums.pigeonwatch.co.uk/forums/topic/433342-do-you-trust-basc/page/13/#comments

I would have thought you wouldnt want to revisit that highly embarrassing thread.