Lead vs Steel shot and pollution

[Salopian]

A few facts need to be mentioned before this debate goes too far.

The Lead shot ban was implemented in the USA, driven by Environmentalist Organisations who received vigorous opposition from the NRA who were unfortunately outnumbered.Modern research has recently been published in the US saying that maybe they got there numbers wrong and it now seems that lead pollution is not the problem that they thought it was.

Eley conducted numerous tests with plastic wads before their introduction into the public domain, where they fed them in animal food to cows without adverse effect.Sheep use their lips and are selective what they eat, so I will safely say that plaswads are not as bad an environmental issue as some people believe (apart from the eyesore of plastic litter).

Steel. The CPSA have issued a directive to claygrounds to not use steel shot if at all possible due to ricochet problems and the ferrous oxide reaction (rusting) causing soil pollution.Many grounds with farming interests are now banning the use of steel shot.

Finally BASC stated they would support the phasing out of lead shot if a viable, economic alternative could be found. How long ago was that statement made David? What is the economical alternative?

[David BASC]

Most recent research I have seen from the US backs up the original findings – it was the poisoning on Condor and Eagle that was the issue- if you want I will reference the relevant papers –secondary poisoning was and is the problem, not only from shotguns but also from bullet fragments.

 

Similar results form Europe also, including the poisoning of woodcock for example

 

Economically viable alternative- yes BASC made that statement at least 10 years ago - possibly a bit more, I remember it used at a wildfowling conference in Blackpool in 1995 or 1996 I think- steel shot well under £200 per 1000 - economically viable and effective now I would suggest as others have already stated on this thread.

 

Unfortunatley when lead was first banned for wildfowl in ENgland there were no ecconomically viable alternatives- so what was the alternative? We had to support compliance!

 

I cant find anything about lead / steel shot on the CPSA site- could you direct me to it please I must be missing it – but, and not trying to be argumentative, but lead shot ricochets as well

 

D

[Salopian]

David,

Ask your Midland office to get you a copyof the CPSA advice from Doveridge, it is posted on their noticeboard.

Sorry but Steel is not a viable alternative to lead. Steel is now banned in some Scandinavian countries in woodland shoots due to damage to chainsaws in the forestry business. Steel cartridges are also noisier and give more perceived recoil. Possibly leading to more issues with noise pollution and recoil related injuries, muscle strains, flinching etc.,

Latest papers in the US sight that possibly their findings with Condor fatalaties were not due to ingestion of lead as at first thought. Also there is another paper out about lead in food not being as bad as first thought. I am sure Tom Roster can furnish you with the papers. If not ask on Doublegunshop.com or shootingsportsman.com they will give you the links.

I am sorry to say that I am not happy with the performance of soft iron shot when used for live quarry shooting, and will continue to use lead and tungsten matrix.

[BlaserF3]

David

 

Why do you hate lead so much?

 

You sound as if you have a personal objection towards shooting with lead and I wonder how BASC members are judging your attitude towards this debate.

 

Steel shot is not very popular at clay grounds now and more and more grounds are banning it.

 

If we go back to the begining I mentioned that BASC wants to ban lead and now you are leading us down that very road with your attitude.

 

I thought that you were on the side of your members but you sound just like an anti who is trying to destroy shooting as it is.

[Salopian]

David is a very nice bloke who will listen to a reasonable debate.He is toeing the party line because their facts are the only ones available to him. I respect that, but we do all need to have an open mind in any argument. No One has ever shown me hard evidence to ban lead, and on numerous occassions , the statistics shown in scientific papers have been shown to be flawed or speculative. Many of my friends are water bailliffs and river keepers and none of them have ever found a bird dead from lead pollution. I was surprised at an earlier posters observations where he has found them.I would loved to have witnessed that for myself, but I haven't.

But please, before promoting the use of steel, carry out a risk assessment.Is there a risk of ricochets? Is there a possibility of damage to grassland or timber?

[David BASC]

Let me make it very clear and for the record BASC is not against lead shot – our policy on lead and its alternatives are here: http://www.basc.org.uk/content/bascpolicyonleadshot

 

I do not hate lead, but as a human biologist I do know and have seen the effects of lead poisoning in animals and humans. As I say, lead is on the Water Framework Directive list of things to remove in total from catchments areas – that should warn you of how thin the veil of protection for lead is.

 

I do not want you guys to believe that there are no problems with lead- there certainly are, it is a poison, it is an environmental pollutant and in relation to lead shot ,I hope the latest research will put this into perspective.

 

As far as the use of lead and the alternatives are concerned I certainty have an open mind- and I will carry on using lead for most of my shooting until I am told otherwise. I know that when steel first came out it was not too good, but others have reported that it is much better now. However, it is lighter and so when shooting pheasant or pigeon for example you need to judge your range carefully – but it will certainly kill at 30-35m but perhaps no more.

 

Yes there are issues in some Scandinavian countries with imbedded steel shot in trees causing major problems in saw mills.

 

I have issue with the plastic wads as most of the places I shoot both clays and pigeon do not want to see plastic wads about

 

On duck and goose I think it has been said by others that some of the other alternatives may be better than steel– much more expensive, but more effective.

 

The kick you get from any load will be as a result of the weight of shot and the speed it goes – faster and heavier loads will kick more. As to noise that may well be a frequency issue as much as a decibel issue but to be honest I am not sure – but you are quite right to raise it, noise pollution is as big if not bigger threat to shooting.

 

Unfortunately it is not possible to completely mimic the properties of lead shot with low cost alternatives, trust me the combined resources of the cartridge manufacturing industry has been working on this for over 20 years.

 

The research conducted in the US and Europe in the past has set us upon this path, that the original research had come under doubt I was not aware, but I will double check this with our research team. We are in a position now where new research is being conducted and based on that research the UK government may well take a decision on lead. What they will say I do not know, but the fact is boys that what ever their decision we, shooters, will need to accept it and comply. Perhaps I am saying to you guys keep an open mind as your decision may be made for you.

 

What would destroy shooting is if we were so belligerent as to try to bully government by saying if you ban lead, as some shooters do not like the alternatives, we will not use the alternatives….err what then? Almost as daft as the hunting lobby bringing the implementation of the hunting ban FORWARD by 18 months!

 

Steel has its problems I accept, but IF lead was banned what is the alternative? If steel is to be used (based on price compared to the other alternatives) then there would need to be a change in the construction of some layouts I suggest, and greater use of personal protective equipment, something the CPSA have been pushing for a few years.

 

David

[MC]

I was going to stay out of this but I now feel that I can't.

 

As an avid shooter and wildfowler for the last 20 years or so I have probably used most types of cartridge. When the lead ban came into force and we all had to use it on the shore no one liked it. Steel was useless and tin was even worse. Tungsten and hevi shot were silly money. However that was 10 or so years ago.

 

With the advent of 3 1/2" chambers and superior steel proof and development form the cartridge companies steel is now excellent. I use Remington cartridge and have shot geese and ducks at longer ranges than I would have done a few years ago and they have been dead in the air. OK I accept you still get Wingers and runners but no more than you did with lead.

 

As far as clay shooting goes, does it really matter that a 60 yard fast edge on crosser might not break? It might not when you are using lead. I have used the latest Express and Gamebore competition steel cartridges and haven't hit or missed any more or less.

 

I do not understand the reasons behind the lead ban, why is it that you can shoot a pheasant with lead and from the same peg have to use NT on a duck. I do not have a problem with using either. It just would make more sense if the area governed what you could or couldn't use rather than the species.

[anser2]

MC I can understand your points about not shooting lead in areas where it could be a problem , but to do so would make the ban almost unenforceable. I think it is safe to say that over 90% of all duck are shot over wetlands , while the reverse is true for game birds.

 

Without risking conflict there is only one way to ensure the ban is being followed and that is to buy ducks from a game dealer and test them . After all how would you feel if after a hard day on the foreshore if some warden came and took your bag away to be tested. I suspect the warden would be at risk of ending up head down in a deep creek. True he could check what cartridges you were using , but would that work ? Home loads would be undectable without cutting the shells open and again would you like to have someone cutting open your shells? And anyway without a strip search ( lovely on a freezing December morning ) how can he ensure the shells shown him are the ones used. In the early days of the ban I knew of a fowler who had non toxic in his belt and lead in his pockets. The only way to restrict the use of lead to game and vermin is to have a blanket ban on lead for waterfowl and wetland SSSIs.

Edited November 25, 2008 by anser2

[MC]

Anser,

 

The ban is unenforcable. It is about as enforcable as the hunting ban. It is only shooters like you and I that stick to the rules.

 

Your point about buying ducks from a game dealer and testing them is OK but I doubt there are many ducks shot on the shore that end up in game dealers. Most will be farmed mallard shot on game shoots and what difference does it make if they were shot with lead. The pheasants on the previous drive were.

[David BASC]

I would suggest that a total ban on lead shot is easier to enforce than the hunting ban.

It could be made illegal to sell lead shot – if this were so then even if people flouted the law the lead shot that is residing in people homes would be used up within a year or so. This was the case with lead shot in fishing weights for example a couple of decades ago.

 

A part ban is harder to enforce as lead shot would still be available – so it could only be policed by spot checks – spot checks at game dealers would be the main part for the larger shoots and , spot checks by ‘officials’ from DEFRA or who ever was set to police it for other forms of shooting as they roam around the countryside listening for ‘bangs’.

 

Of course IF it were banned for clay shooting this too would be easy to enforce, as no ground owner is going to risk breaking the law are they?

 

David

[Salopian]

Twenty five years ago I used to shoot at a clayground in South Australia near Victor Harbour.It was closed down by environmental officer due to lead polluting a watercourse.This seriously peed me off.I used the young scientists from Adelaide Uni to PROVE that the toxicity came from natural lead deposits upstream from the ground, and the actual contamination from the ground was increasing the water pollution an insignificant amount.

As I have said if you are going to use science make sure your figures are not flawed. What about the water carrying pipes underneath our cities such as London, Birmingham, Manchester etc., have all the lead pipes been replaced? Are you sure?

But enough of this, I will now bow out gracefully.

Good shooting everyone, may your powder stay dry, your eye stay clear and your aim stay straight. and lead sphericals to all of you.Merry Christmas from the Salopian.

[MC]

I would suggest that a total ban on lead shot is easier to enforce than the hunting ban.

It could be made illegal to sell lead shot – if this were so then even if people flouted the law the lead shot that is residing in people homes would be used up within a year or so. This was the case with lead shot in fishing weights for example a couple of decades ago.

 

A part ban is harder to enforce as lead shot would still be available – so it could only be policed by spot checks – spot checks at game dealers would be the main part for the larger shoots and , spot checks by ‘officials’ from DEFRA or who ever was set to police it for other forms of shooting as they roam around the countryside listening for ‘bangs’.

 

Of course IF it were banned for clay shooting this too would be easy to enforce, as no ground owner is going to risk breaking the law are they?

 

David

 

Very true David,

 

I was however speaking about now and the ban in place at the moment. Not a hypothetical what if.

 

Maybe I am now tempting fate but in my 20+ years of shooting I have never been approached by anyone, baliff, policeman or anyone from DEFRA.

[David BASC]

MC,

 

I take your point- on a similar note I am a keen fisherman - been fishing for 30 years – religiously buy my rod licence every year, indeed I am on DD and never ever had I been asked by bailiff etc for it- until last year when I was asked three times in 2 weeks on one of the canals up here! :yp:

 

The current ban has not been actively policed I must say, although there have been threats from time to time.

 

Whether that is a good thing or not I do not know. I would hope that compliance is high, because I can only imagine the repercussions, swift and brutal they would be for all of us I suspect, if it were found that compliance was low!

Edited November 25, 2008 by David BASC

[markbivvy]

MC,

 

I take your point- on a similar note I am a keen fisherman - been fishing for 30 years – religiously buy my rod licence every year, indeed I am on DD and never ever had I been asked by bailiff etc for it- until last year when I was asked three times in 2 weeks on one of the canals up here!

 

The current ban has not been actively policed I must say, although there have been threats from time to time.

 

Whether that is a good thing or not I do not know. I would hope that compliance is high, because I can only imagine the repercussions, swift and brutal they would be for all of us I suspect, if it were found that compliance was low!

:blink:

Edited March 31, 2010 by markbivvy

[toka_shigazu]

..it seems like the start of a slippery slope to me! if lead is bannnd we move to steel, i would suggest within months [especially if any anti's etc have been reading this thread alone] there will be a big push to ban steel as it is even worse than lead....it could also be pointed out that the shooting arean knew this and still went for steel - showing the antis and joe public that we have a blatant disregard for any welfare issues to the environment etc.

 

i think the bodies responsible will have to think long and hard on this otherwise they could end up with egg on their face.

 

i agree that no one would 'want' to drink eat poisoned stuff...but there seem to be more studies needed to find out if lead shot was banned how much of a difference would it make to the level of lead put into the food chain and then a decision can be made. why change something for something worse? the other thing would be to look at other metals less harmful, cheaper, still do the job and able to be made into shot/bullets etc.

 

ATB

[jko]

..it seems like the start of a slippery slope to me! if lead is bannnd we move to steel, i would suggest within months [especially if any anti's etc have been reading this thread alone] there will be a big push to ban steel as it is even worse than lead....it could also be pointed out that the shooting arean knew this and still went for steel - showing the antis and joe public that we have a blatant disregard for any welfare issues to the environment etc.

 

i think the bodies responsible will have to think long and hard on this otherwise they could end up with egg on their face.

 

i agree that no one would 'want' to drink eat poisoned stuff...but there seem to be more studies needed to find out if lead shot was banned how much of a difference would it make to the level of lead put into the food chain and then a decision can be made. why change something for something worse? the other thing would be to look at other metals less harmful, cheaper, still do the job and able to be made into shot/bullets etc.

 

ATB

Hhmm, seems that BASC supporters are showing their true support ! they dont really care about what is the best /humane load to dispatch approved quarry. looks like they are are only too pleased to follow anti shooting guidlines putting down proper recocknised lead in humane culling of some of the species known..... BEWARE OF THE QUISLINGS WITHIN

[Shuck.]

David BASC, as a Human Biologist don't you feel that steel would be just as bad if not worse for the environment then lead if we're just talking about degridation in the soil?

[toka_shigazu]

jko...lol not sure if that is a dig or not, or whether my comment hasnt come across well...

 

i am a BASC member but am voicing my concerns of a move away from lead...towards something that may be more harmful [steel], and the harm to our [shooting] reputation by agreeing to move away from lead, towards a possibly more harmful, less effective material? when there may be more studies needed to show exacty how harmful lead is to humans/animals etc...

 

i have no doubt that an animal shot with lead my suffer a slow and poisoning death...but then again an animal shot with steel may suffer as bad a death through other metal poisoning....but in both examples, as shooters, i would suggest neither is a wanted solution as everyone would prefer a clean humane kill? its got to be a balanced argument and perhaps more studies are needed to get that info....until we have that evidence why change, thats all i am saying...

 

gotta say i am happy with BASC so far although i do share the same concerns as a lot on here about how hard things are being pushed for etc...but it is good that their representatives, like David are on sites like this and are accessible/available for comment. there arent many other organisations that offer that level of contactability for their members [again my own personal view and i could be wrong]

[Angelfire]

"Many supermarkets will not take fruit & veg from farmers who let shooting over their land due to the possible contamination of the crop by lead shot." Says David BASC.

 

Step up to the mark, give us the names of these "many supermarkets", I for one will stop using them. Period.

 

Seems to me BASC is trying its best to get lead banned with this kind of statement, and the shooter is PAYING SUBS to BASC for this to happen, foolish, deluded or what?.

 

Regards

 

Angelfire.

[MC]

You obviously haven't read the BASC website or any of the posts on this forum from its members of staff.

 

Please don't come over here and try and shout everyone down like you do on Claysporting. You will not be made very welcome if you do.

[Angelfire]

MC,

 

You obviously think I give a damn about what you write, and you may think you are important on here, so you are wrong on both counts.

 

As a contributor to the forum I will scribe as I like, and not to what YOU think I should scribe. Sorry I do not fit in with your ideals.

 

Back to my original post of which offends you,

 

 

""Many supermarkets will not take fruit & veg from farmers who let shooting over their land due to the possible contamination of the crop by lead shot." Says David BASC."

 

Step up to the mark, give us the names of these "many supermarkets", I for one will stop using them. Period.

 

What can offend you with that question.

 

 

The rest of my post.

 

"Seems to me BASC is trying its best to get lead banned with this kind of statement, and the shooter is PAYING SUBS to BASC for this to happen, foolish, deluded or what?."

 

I cannot see anything wrong with that statement either, its MY opinion of the facts.

 

Regards to one who has had the wool pulled over his eyes.

 

Angel.

[MC]

MC,

 

You obviously think I give a damn about what you write, and you may think you are important on here, so you are wrong on both counts.

 

As a contributor to the forum I will scribe as I like, and not to what YOU think I should scribe. Sorry I do not fit in with your ideals.

 

Back to my original post of which offends you,

 

 

""Many supermarkets will not take fruit & veg from farmers who let shooting over their land due to the possible contamination of the crop by lead shot." Says David BASC."

 

Step up to the mark, give us the names of these "many supermarkets", I for one will stop using them. Period.

 

What can offend you with that question.

 

 

The rest of my post.

 

"Seems to me BASC is trying its best to get lead banned with this kind of statement, and the shooter is PAYING SUBS to BASC for this to happen, foolish, deluded or what?."

 

I cannot see anything wrong with that statement either, its MY opinion of the facts.

 

Regards to one who has had the wool pulled over his eyes.

 

Angel.

 

 

Well I will say one thing for you,

 

You don't disappoint.

 

I neither think I am important on here or care what you say. You have shown how arrogant you are on more than one occasion on Claysporting and as there is a bit of a debate on here you think you will come over and bully your way in.

 

You obviously pay your subs to the CPSA, can you tell me what they are doing to prevent a lead ban? It won't take long as they are more interested in paying off the CEO and stopping themselves going under.

[Angelfire]

Glad to say I am a life member of the CPSA, have been for many many years. As for the Association going bust, sorry to dissapoint you again, its in a very healthy state.

 

I also see you and David sing form the same sheet, with wild statements that bear no regard for the truth. You scribe on here, " You have shown how arrogant you are on more than one occasion on Claysporting and as there is a bit of a debate on here you think you will come over and bully your way in."

 

Please show me ONE instance where I have been arrogant on Claysporting. Show me also where I have tried to "bully my way in" on this forum.

 

I await your response. Or like David will you ignore my post because you have no answer to it.

[Chard]

Oo-er Mrs

[BlaserF3]

I post on Claysporting and find Angelfire very polite to others and myself in all his replies.

 

I just wish some of the others were just as polite as him.