Lead shot report in todays news

[rbrowning2]

EU look to have more common sense than U.K. HSE would be great if now the U.K. followed the EU.

 

[SxS]

23 hours ago, Old farrier said:

Of course they found lead pellets in pheasant it’s not illegal it’s a voluntary transition

A voluntary transition that nobody seems to be making. 
 

It’s almost as if people want to believe that everyone else will transition so that their own personal use of lead becomes immaterial and it isn’t banned (which it probably will be if enough people don’t start making the switch). 
 

In some ways it surprises me that sporting estates/shoots selling game aren’t insisting that their shooters switch. Much like many are “fibre only”.  My gut feeling is that they don’t want to be having that conversation with guns paying big money to shoot there (who may go elsewhere if the wish to shoot lead). 

[Old farrier]

3 hours ago, SxS said:

A voluntary transition that nobody seems to be making. 
 

It’s almost as if people want to believe that everyone else will transition so that their own personal use of lead becomes immaterial and it isn’t banned (which it probably will be if enough people don’t start making the switch). 
 

In some ways it surprises me that sporting estates/shoots selling game aren’t insisting that their shooters switch. Much like many are “fibre only”.  My gut feeling is that they don’t want to be having that conversation with guns paying big money to shoot there (who may go elsewhere if the wish to shoot lead). 

It’s a choice thing and only becomes a problem when you start selling surplus game it’s not hard for shoots to state various rules and for the agent to check them 

it’s not that hard for the game dealers to check either before they sell it on 

it’s a voluntary transition however it appears that the uptake on change is low could it be that when looking at the science behind it it doesn’t really add up 

[Gas seal]

Hi SxS .Published by DEFRA 9th November 2010 Re illegally shot ducks with lead shot.

DEFRA funded study, researchers found 70% of ducks purchased from English game dealers, butchers and supermarkets had been shot illegally with lead pellets. 
 

A BASC survey found up to 45% of respondents admitted to not always complying with the law regarding wildfowl and lead shot.

I don’t know if any one selling the ducks or supplying the ducks were prosecuted ,they could have been able to trace were they came from, even if they were all shot in Scotland.

Will game dealers take anything shot with steel pellets. I would say that they would have to remove steel pellets before selling them on. Will game be more expensive in supermarkets and game dealers paying less for game. 
 

[Scully]

6 hours ago, SxS said:

A voluntary transition that nobody seems to be making. 
 

It’s almost as if people want to believe that everyone else will transition so that their own personal use of lead becomes immaterial and it isn’t banned (which it probably will be if enough people don’t start making the switch). 
 

In some ways it surprises me that sporting estates/shoots selling game aren’t insisting that their shooters switch. Much like many are “fibre only”.  My gut feeling is that they don’t want to be having that conversation with guns paying big money to shoot there (who may go elsewhere if the wish to shoot lead). 

If it’s voluntary it’s pointless. If cartridge manufacturers are still making lead shot then guns will continue using it. 
Why wouldn’t they? 
It’s only those who depend on driven game shooting for their income, including the saleability of its produce to those who have been deliberately misled about the risks of eating lead shot game, who are driving this agenda. 

[SxS]

2 hours ago, Old farrier said:

it’s a voluntary transition however it appears that the uptake on change is low could it be that when looking at the science behind it it doesn’t really add up 

That’s mixing two things: the transition itself and the logic behind it. 

Given the agenda of other parties, we can’t just say “the science is flawed so we’re not doing it” and then expect that our hand won’t be forced at some point.   Similarly, the cartridge manufacturers will continue to make what sells.  I’ve used bismuth when I’ve had to (even though it is bloody expensive) but will admit that I’m yet to shoot steel (but I may try some soon through my pump). 

37 minutes ago, Scully said:

It’s only those who depend on driven game shooting for their income, including the saleability of its produce to those who have been deliberately misled about the risks of eating lead shot game, who are driving this agenda. 

Do any estates insist on lead free shot?  Aside from duck drives where the need for non-toxic is sometimes mentioned, I don’t recall being on one that did (but will caveat that I’ve not shot a lot for the past couple of seasons). 

[Scully]

2 hours ago, SxS said:

 

Do any estates insist on lead free shot?  Aside from duck drives where the need for non-toxic is sometimes mentioned, I don’t recall being on one that did (but will caveat that I’ve not shot a lot for the past couple of seasons). 

I don’t know of any. 🤷‍♂️

I shoot and beat on more than a few shoots, both commercial and otherwise, and despite BASC’s or  ( @Conor O'Gorman)  s claims to the contrary,  I’ve yet to meet either which insists on non toxic. 

[Old farrier]

1 hour ago, SxS said:

That’s mixing two things: the transition itself and the logic behind it. 

Given the agenda of other parties, we can’t just say “the science is flawed so we’re not doing it” and then expect that our hand won’t be forced at some point.   Similarly, the cartridge manufacturers will continue to make what sells.  I’ve used bismuth when I’ve had to (even though it is bloody expensive) but will admit that I’m yet to shoot steel (but I may try some soon through my pump). 

Do any estates insist on lead free shot?  Aside from duck drives where the need for non-toxic is sometimes mentioned, I don’t recall being on one that did (but will caveat that I’ve not shot a lot for the past couple of seasons). 

Well I’ve shot plenty of steel mostly with plastic wads in the last 20 years and do for wildfowling through a heavy gun built for it with the normal rarely more than 10 shots on a flight

iv tried many of the bio options and yes they are improving 
you should try steel and have a informed opinion on the product 

steel through a game gun is a different thing altogether along with the far increased number of shots on a driven day there’s no way I’m going to buy bismuth for a day pheasant shooting unless requested by the host or agent 

estates insist on many things fibre wads insurance license and back in the day game license along with no ground game no pigeons it depends upon the estate the only estate I’m aware of allegedly is wartor prior 

so it appears the bigger shoots arnt onboard with the voluntary transition or they would be on the case and require guns to shoot non lead 

[TIGHTCHOKE]

9 hours ago, Old farrier said:

Well I’ve shot plenty of steel mostly with plastic wads in the last 20 years and do for wildfowling through a heavy gun built for it with the normal rarely more than 10 shots on a flight iv tried many of the bio options and yes they are improving you should try steel and have a informed opinion on the product steel through a game gun is a different thing altogether along with the far increased number of shots on a driven day there’s no way I’m going to buy bismuth for a day pheasant shooting unless requested by the host or agent estates insist on many things fibre wads insurance license and back in the day game license along with no ground game no pigeons it depends upon the estate the only estate I’m aware of allegedly is wartor prior so it appears the bigger shoots arnt onboard with the voluntary transition or they would be on the case and require guns to shoot non lead 

Oh you've noticed that too.............................

[Down South]

Why would bigger shoots action a voluntary ban, what’s in it for them? If there was a voluntary ban on spending cash because it could transmit disease would you leave your stash under the mattress or carry on spending it? A simple solution on to the lead issue is to make selling game shot with lead illegal! The game dealers would have to insist their supplies were unadulterated and shoots would have to comply or face the prospect of mountains of wasted game. Pigeon controllers would face the same dilemma and so the use of lead shot would diminish to the extent where cartridge assemblers would no longer find it profitable to sell lead based products. Job done. Just my take. I’ll carry on using my lead cartridges until I’m no longer allowed to.

[Gas seal]

Game dealers, butcher’s and supermarkets sold ducks illegally shot with lead pellets. One survey in 2003 and one in 2010, if action was taken against whoever shot them and whoever sold them it would have shown shooters as responsible people.

Any conviction would result in loss of licences, for shooters and dealers. Now it’s another reason not to trust shooters .

 If it was made illegal to sell game shot with lead would stop killing game with lead. There is a lot against shooting now and a lot of mistrust of shooters.

[PeterHenry]

51 minutes ago, Gas seal said:

Game dealers, butcher’s and supermarkets sold ducks illegally shot with lead pellets. One survey in 2003 and one in 2010, if action was taken against whoever shot them and whoever sold them it would have shown shooters as responsible people.

Any conviction would result in loss of licences, for shooters and dealers. Now it’s another reason not to trust shooters .

 If it was made illegal to sell game shot with lead would stop killing game with lead. There is a lot against shooting now and a lot of mistrust of shooters.

Is it illegal to sell ducks shot with lead? 

I appreciate that it's illegal to shoot them with lead in England and Wales - but it's legal over dry land in Scotland. 

I can't say one way or the other, but I'd be very surprised with the above being the case, if it was an offence to sell them.

[SxS]

1 hour ago, Down South said:

Why would bigger shoots action a voluntary ban, what’s in it for them? If there was a voluntary ban on spending cash because it could transmit disease would you leave your stash under the mattress or carry on spending it? A simple solution on to the lead issue is to make selling game shot with lead illegal! The game dealers would have to insist their supplies were unadulterated and shoots would have to comply or face the prospect of mountains of wasted game. Pigeon controllers would face the same dilemma and so the use of lead shot would diminish to the extent where cartridge assemblers would no longer find it profitable to sell lead based products. Job done. Just my take. I’ll carry on using my lead cartridges until I’m no longer allowed to.

What’s in it for them?  Their future. 
 

They are already in the firing line, including from a non-trivial number of game shots, for enormous bag sizes… not to mention the money involved and perceived “class” of guns on big shoots placing them right in the cross-hairs of labour’s ideological warfare. 
 

I agree that a ban on sales of game shot with lead would make sense but there’s a practical issue around testing and compliance.  I am sure, for example, that many have shot on drives/shoots where non-toxic has been needed, for say a duck drive, and most of the empties in the sack look remarkably similar to lead shells… how on earth is a dealer/butcher supposed to ensure full compliance?  The simple answer is they can’t, so if the penalties are too draconian then they’ll simply stop buying/selling game - at which point the arguments around sustainability, free-range, etc vapourise if there’s no outlet for surplus shot game. 

[Down South]

 

49 minutes ago, SxS said:

What’s in it for them?  Their future.

The bigger shoots have a future as long as live quarry shooting is still allowed, when lead is banned then the transition to non toxic will happen.

Game meat will always be under scrutiny as no matter what it was shot with there will always be organisations/individuals that will do there utmost to stop our way of life.

[wymberley]

On 07/03/2025 at 08:59, rbrowning2 said:

EU look to have more common sense than U.K. HSE would be great if now the U.K. followed the EU.

 

 But be careful what you wish for:

[SxS]

1 hour ago, Down South said:

 

The bigger shoots have a future as long as live quarry shooting is still allowed, when lead is banned then the transition to non toxic will happen.

Game meat will always be under scrutiny as no matter what it was shot with there will always be organisations/individuals that will do there utmost to stop our way of life.

The largest shoots are an extension of the broader shooting community and, I would wager, are responsible for much of the game output… those 400+ bag days several days a week won’t all be going home in the cars of the guns/beaters/dog teams.

They’re also obvious targets for calls of elitism and “excess”. There certainly aren’t many people who can pay the sorts of money they demand and want such big days.  Candidly anyone shooting those numbers should be able to afford to switch to non-toxic - even if (and I accept this is a really radical idea) they had to drop 50/100 birds off the bag to keep the costs similar.

My personal view is that the big shoots need to be leading by example, not ignoring the issue for one simple reason: if they don’t then there’s a real risk of a ban that will affect grass roots shooters.  The types that maybe shoot in small syndicates or undertake pigeon control where the birds do get taken home and/or are consumed by people who don’t object to lead in their meat. Take away too many of those and the strength of any collective voice against an outright ban gets weaker. 

[Down South]

24 minutes ago, SxS said:

The types that maybe shoot in small syndicates or undertake pigeon control where the birds do get taken home and/or are consumed by people who don’t object to lead in their meat.

This is me and my style of shooting.
When I was a lad big shoots around here were few and probably not run on a commercial basis but couldn’t say for sure.  I agree that the business element of shooting should lead by example but even I find it hard to justify shooting birds for profit. It’s not farming after all. I’ve always thought the big bag shoots would bring us all down.

[TIGHTCHOKE]

5 hours ago, Down South said:

Why would bigger shoots action a voluntary ban, what’s in it for them? If there was a voluntary ban on spending cash because it could transmit disease would you leave your stash under the mattress or carry on spending it? A simple solution on to the lead issue is to make selling game shot with lead illegal! The game dealers would have to insist their supplies were unadulterated and shoots would have to comply or face the prospect of mountains of wasted game. Pigeon controllers would face the same dilemma and so the use of lead shot would diminish to the extent where cartridge assemblers would no longer find it profitable to sell lead based products. Job done. Just my take. I’ll carry on using my lead cartridges until I’m no longer allowed to.

The BIG Shoots see the "harvested" game as a problem, if it doesn't sell or taken for nothing then they will dump it in to holes in the ground.

 

They just want to drive lots of birds over guns with too much money and we, the ordinary shooters are going to have to toe the line so the BIG Boys can have their way

[rbrowning2]

2 hours ago, wymberley said:

 But be careful what you wish for:

 

I don’t wish for anything 😊 but it would be nice of governments and civil servants would just leave shooting alone, we already have probably the toughest gun laws anywhere, lead shot on clay grounds is a tiny risk to the environment, as is airgun pellets and .22lr bullets.  But they must keep looking like they know what’s best to improve things, rather than leave alone, or blame the police for the likes of Plymouth.  By the time they finish in what fours to five years shooting as a recreational sport in this country will be a fraction of what is is or was in the past.

 

 

Edited 23 hours ago by rbrowning2

[Gas seal]

Hi Peter, I would have thought it would be illegal to sell ducks that had been killed illegally. A customer could purchase wild duck in England because they know it contains no lead .Wild Justice have said that the game laws are outdated and should be changed, this could be one of the reasons why.

 No doubt the selling of ducks shot with lead will be on the agenda next week in the House of Lords. 

[Gas seal]

Hi Peter, this was discussed in Parliament by Lord Kimball 9th of November 1999. Re lead shot.
 

Attention was drawn to the question of enforcement. I remind noble Lords that the premise’s of every game dealer are subject to inspection. If there has been a complaint about a shoot it is perfectly in order for the police to inspect the game dealer register and the game on his premises. I believe that the regulations are more enforceable than people realise.

[PeterHenry]

15 hours ago, Gas seal said:

Hi Peter, I would have thought it would be illegal to sell ducks that had been killed illegally. A customer could purchase wild duck in England because they know it contains no lead .Wild Justice have said that the game laws are outdated and should be changed, this could be one of the reasons why.

 No doubt the selling of ducks shot with lead will be on the agenda next week in the House of Lords. 

Normally, a crime requires intent. If a game dealer is just takeing the birds off the shoot, and it's not widespread practice to screen for lead - I don't think a crime would currently be committed by the game dealer.

Another- far worse - example would be a supermarket selling Findus lasagna in 2013. Its not the supermarkets fault - and it's not the role of the supermarket to DNA check products it's bought in. Likewise its not the role of a game dealer to routinely screen for lead shot in duck. Even more so when they could also be selling duck from Scotland - and other game legally shot with lead from England and Wales.

I always get a little suspicious when WJ (or anyone for that matter) say such and such a law is outdated, because what I suspect they are actually saying is 'we don't like this law but can't think of a good reason to justify it out loud'. In this case though, the laws surrounding game - while sensible enough - are not well codified. So I suspect (without further investigation on a Sunday morning) they are trying - to mix metaphors - tar everything with a broad brush.

Out of intrest - why do you mention lead shot duck being on the agenda in the House of Lords next week? I thought the big political decision in the next week or so was coming from Defra / Steve Reed?

12 hours ago, Gas seal said:

Hi Peter, this was discussed in Parliament by Lord Kimball 9th of November 1999. Re lead shot.
 

Attention was drawn to the question of enforcement. I remind noble Lords that the premise’s of every game dealer are subject to inspection. If there has been a complaint about a shoot it is perfectly in order for the police to inspect the game dealer register and the game on his premises. I believe that the regulations are more enforceable than people realise.

That's interesting - but I'm not sure there's a game dealers register anymore? Presumably it went out with the game dealers licences in 2007?

Edited 4 hours ago by PeterHenry

[old man]

On 06/03/2025 at 07:34, holloway said:

All official evidence taken from game dealers ,so if they do ban lead and retest from game dealers in 5 years time they will deem the law is not being adhered to and ban all shooting of game .

And it could all have been avoided.

Doubtful as it was sought by some?

[old man]

22 hours ago, rbrowning2 said:

I don’t wish for anything 😊 but it would be nice of governments and civil servants would just leave shooting alone, we already have probably the toughest gun laws anywhere, lead shot on clay grounds is a tiny risk to the environment, as is airgun pellets and .22lr bullets.  But they must keep looking like they know what’s best to improve things, rather than leave alone, or blame the police for the likes of Plymouth.  By the time they finish in what fours to five years shooting as a recreational sport in this country will be a fraction of what is is or was in the past.

 

 

Surely that's the objective?