Efforts to ban lead shot -- tell me about it

samzheresamzhere BannedPosts: 10,923 Senior Member
I haven't hunted since I was in my 20s and I only used rifles, so I'm totally ignorant about the campaign to ban lead shot.

So please educate me on the situation. I've got some questions and I really don't know about this, so my questions may seem goofy, but just bear with me...

1- What is the supposed danger about lead shot? Is it that the metal will poison the environment?

2- What is the problem about just using steel shot? What are the things about steel shot (which I guess would replace lead shot if it were banned) that make it undesirable?

Thanks!

Outside of a dog, a book is a man’s best friend. Inside of a dog, it’s too dark to read. - Groucho Marx
«134

Replies

  • Six-GunSix-Gun Senior Member Posts: 7,219 Senior Member
    Sam -

    While I'm too young to have been around for the original debate, my understanding is that the issue with lead shot had to do with waterfowl sifting it out of the mud and ingesting it, killing them.

    Steel shot will kill a duck or goose quite dead, but due to its low density, peters out very rapidly compared to lead. That's why people will still choose lead whenever legal: longer range killing power requiring less angled lead in the target.
    Accuracy: because white space between bullet holes drives me insane.
  • KENFU1911KENFU1911 Senior Member Posts: 1,052 Senior Member
    The tree huggers fear the lead will injure the animals...poison the fish, and those that eat the fish, and move up the food chain.
    Those that propose lead restrictions are also going after rifle ammo, with the idea that lead fragments in a gut pile or a dead varmint will be ingested but a Condor or coyote and cause damage.
    So they are boiling a frog in Calif.
    ..... Fish and Game Commission modified the Methods Authorized for Taking Big Game (Section 353, Title 14, CCR) in December, 2007 to prohibit the use of projectiles containing lead for hunting deer, bear, wild pig, elk, and pronghorn antelope in areas designated as California condor range. Modifications to Methods of Take for Nongame Birds and Mammals (Section 475, Title 14, CCR) were also adopted to prohibit the use of lead projectiles in the same areas when hunting coyotes, ground squirrels, and other non-game wildlife.

    Effective July 1, 2008, all big-game and non-game hunters within this area (Lead-Free Ammunition area link below) are required to use lead-free ammunition

    AB 711 added several sections to Fish and Game Code, one of which (3005.5(b)) requires a complete ban on the use of lead ammunition for any hunting purposes anywhere in the State by July 1, 2019.

    So now In Calif. and other soon to follow, call me jaded, anyone that wants take the kids rabbit hunting, or maybe Quail hunting, had better have the money for high dollar "Certified" non lead ammo.

    As for Steel shot for hunting, in My opinion the stuff is junk. Steel is much lighter having less density than lead, so it does not hit as hard or penetrate as well, resulting in more follow up shots and/or wounded game.
    The alternative is the "SuperShot" loads, which take deeper pockets..

    Federal Steel shot for ducks. 12 Gauge 3" 1-7/8 oz. # 4 Regular Price: $9.99
    Hevi Shot non toxic 12 Gauge 3" 1-1/4 oz. # 1 Regular Price: $27.99

    The Hevi shot will kill better than steel, Maybe as well as lead, but at far greater cost to the hunter... as for rifle ammo, some rifles just won't shoot the non lead ammo near as accurately as old fashioned cup and core copper /lead bullets, again resulting in the possibility of more follow up shots and/or more wounded game. ... Ken
    My idea of a warning shot is when the 2nd bad guy watches his 1st buddy go down....
  • snake284snake284 Senior Member Posts: 21,802 Senior Member
    I was hunting waterfowl before the non lead laws came into effect. Many thought it was BS here, and it may have all been just that. However, I have talked to non-bunny hugging biologist that vouched for the fact that lead was killing some birds. However, as for game that doesn't live on the water (Hence Water Fowl) I suspect this could all be just an agenda driven movement with the ultimate goal of reducing hunters to the point it would be easier to outlaw hunting all together. Outlaw hunting and there goes the reason most own guns in this country, or at least it puts us in the minority. This will reduce our base and allow the anti gunners their way with us. Outlaw hunting and it is my fear it will only be a short time before all guns are outlawed. This is what I believe is the .main motivation of the anti lead movement. The pendulum had better start to swing back our direction or we and our constitutional rights are more than likely screwed.
    Daddy, what's an enabler?
    Son that's somebody with nothing to do with his time but keep me in trouble with mom.
  • orchidmanorchidman Senior Member Posts: 7,698 Senior Member
    Six-Gun wrote: »
    Sam -

    Steel shot will kill a duck or goose quite dead, but due to its low density, peters out very rapidly compared to lead. That's why people will still choose lead whenever legal: longer range killing power requiring less angled lead in the target.

    To add to this, lead shot ( being soft) will deform when it hits something, and more energy is theoretically transmitted to the object. Steel shot will not deform, it just bores a hole into a duck..........in most cases just passing right through the bird ( depending on range of course)

    Here is an example: Was duck hunting last weekend when 4 mallards and a Grey duck came through the decoys, cupped their wings and slowed right down. GB and I opened up and dropped two of them....then we both swung on the same bird ( the Grey) and fired again. Feathers came off it...........but it continued to fly and eventually we lost sight of it at about 2 miles as it flew out into the harbour. ( it was flying as though it hadn't been hit)

    About 2 hours later GB pointed out what looked like a stick floating in the water about 200yds out. When I looked, it appeared to me to be a duck, so we untied the boat and went out to check. It was the same bird ( the Grey duck) we had fired at and was stone dead. While we waited for the next flight I started plucking it to see how many pellets it had absorbed and found that it had taken 6 #3 steel through the body. All the pellets had passed through the breast bone and exited the bird. We were lucky that the tide and wind had carried the bird back to us.

    Although we are required to use steel for waterfowl hunting, most of the culls I carry out are done with lead. After culling birds for the last 20 yrs my observations and experience have shown me that lead is far more effective than steel under all circumstances.

    I liken the difference as this. Lead is like hitting a duck with a blunt object........steel is like drilling a hole in the duck with an electric drill........Lead causes more trauma and 'shock', steel requires more and bigger pellets to have the same effect and is far less efficient at longer ranges.

    Since we changed over to steel a few years back, I have found far more birds either wounded or dead from steel shot than I ever did from lead when doing my rounds as a Ranger..............but, its here to stay and I have adapted my shooting style to take into account the limitations of steel.

    Hope this helps Sam.
    Still enjoying the trip of a lifetime and making the best of what I have.....
  • samzheresamzhere Banned Posts: 10,923 Senior Member
    Thanks gang for the excellent feedback!

    Outside of a dog, a book is a man’s best friend. Inside of a dog, it’s too dark to read. - Groucho Marx
  • snake284snake284 Senior Member Posts: 21,802 Senior Member
    orchidman wrote: »
    To add to this, lead shot ( being soft) will deform when it hits something, and more energy is theoretically transmitted to the object. Steel shot will not deform, it just bores a hole into a duck..........in most cases just passing right through the bird ( depending on range of course)

    Here is an example: Was duck hunting last weekend when 4 mallards and a Grey duck came through the decoys, cupped their wings and slowed right down. GB and I opened up and dropped two of them....then we both swung on the same bird ( the Grey) and fired again. Feathers came off it...........but it continued to fly and eventually we lost sight of it at about 2 miles as it flew out into the harbour. ( it was flying as though it hadn't been hit)

    About 2 hours later GB pointed out what looked like a stick floating in the water about 200yds out. When I looked, it appeared to me to be a duck, so we untied the boat and went out to check. It was the same bird ( the Grey duck) we had fired at and was stone dead. While we waited for the next flight I started plucking it to see how many pellets it had absorbed and found that it had taken 6 #3 steel through the body. All the pellets had passed through the breast bone and exited the bird. We were lucky that the tide and wind had carried the bird back to us.

    Although we are required to use steel for waterfowl hunting, most of the culls I carry out are done with lead. After culling birds for the last 20 yrs my observations and experience have shown me that lead is far more effective than steel under all circumstances.

    I liken the difference as this. Lead is like hitting a duck with a blunt object........steel is like drilling a hole in the duck with an electric drill........Lead causes more trauma and 'shock', steel requires more and bigger pellets to have the same effect and is far less efficient at longer ranges.

    Since we changed over to steel a few years back, I have found far more birds either wounded or dead from steel shot than I ever did from lead when doing my rounds as a Ranger..............but, its here to stay and I have adapted my shooting style to take into account the limitations of steel.

    Hope this helps Sam.

    And this might mesh up pretty well with what I said. I said that I had talked to some non agenda motivated Texas Biologists who had told me they had seen some birds they believed to have been sickened from lead. However, though that may be true, I will add that I have seen my share of wounded birds out in the bay since steel shot has been the rule. What I'm getting at is maybe the powers that be should consider the lesser of the evils here. What is hurting the duck population most? Lead or less effective steel? But I suspect we may never learn the truth. Common sense might never prevail.
    Daddy, what's an enabler?
    Son that's somebody with nothing to do with his time but keep me in trouble with mom.
  • BigslugBigslug Senior Member Posts: 6,941 Senior Member
    I tend to think the greenies may have a point with the waterfowl side of this argument. Rivers, lakes, etc... are the locations you hunt these guys in. Those geological features do not move - shot is going to build up in these places over time, and a critter that eats stuff off the bottom is going to get a belly full of either lead or lead oxides. Wounding a few may be preferable to poisoning all.

    Condors getting sick to the point of dying from fragments in unrecovered game or gut pile? I've got severe doubts on that one, and tend to think it's a case of the anti-gun, HSUS/PETA, and EPA nutballs in bed having a wild threesome at our expense. The days of tetra-ethyl leaded gasoline left more lead in the surface environment than all the bullets fired in all the small arms in all the wars that have ever used them. I think that's where the real problem likely lies.
    WWJMBD?

    "Nothing is safe from stupid." - Zee
  • samzheresamzhere Banned Posts: 10,923 Senior Member
    So it does appear that the whiners may actually have a point, that lead shot might be an environmental hazard. Which is understandable -- we really didn't wise up to leaded gasoline in the environment, or lead base paint hazards for a long time.

    Understand, I'm clueless on the facts, which is why I started the thread, to learn somethin' new.

    But if lead shot is indeed a hazard (and I'm not saying it is) and if impartial and sharp gun owners come to that conclusion, then it behooves them to get into the front on this and campaign for alternate shot (maybe some sort of super-dense polymer?) and take the issue away from the anti-2A crowd.

    Are there any high tech alternates to steel shot? I don't know that either. But this is maybe an opportunity instead of a detriment -- some smart ammo company (or G&A forumite) figures a non-steel alternate to lead and makes a mint.

    But what makes sense to someone like me, pro-gun but also pro-conservation, is to deny the antis any sort of issue. If in fact lead shot is bad for wildlife (besides getting hit with it, ha ha) then it should be decided impartially and scientifically, not emotionally. Anything we can do to take the "banner" out of the anti-2A crowd is best, I think.

    Thanks again, guys!

    Outside of a dog, a book is a man’s best friend. Inside of a dog, it’s too dark to read. - Groucho Marx
  • wildgenewildgene Senior Member Posts: 1,036 Senior Member
    ...you might want to take a look @ the "Scientific Studies" used to promote lead bans, like condor & raptor death/ lead associations. They share a lot of common traits w/ "Gun Control, Global Warming, Spotted Owl, etc.etc.etc. studies" in that most of them have been "cooked" to support a predetermined conclusion, most have been proven to be "misleading" if not outright false, there is an agenda behind them that doesn't regard any actual facts, & statements, statistics, & quotes from the studies are generally erroneous, taken out of context, or revised to fit that agenda...
  • BAMAAKBAMAAK Senior Member Posts: 4,259 Senior Member
    wildgene wrote: »
    ...you might want to take a look @ the "Scientific Studies" used to promote lead bans, like condor & raptor death/ lead associations. They share a lot of common traits w/ "Gun Control, Global Warming, Spotted Owl, etc.etc.etc. studies" in that most of them have been "cooked" to support a predetermined conclusion, most have been proven to be "misleading" if not outright false, there is an agenda behind them that doesn't regard any actual facts, & statements, statistics, & quotes from the studies are generally erroneous, taken out of context, or revised to fit that agenda...

    The same folks who don't mind killing the same birds in greater numbers with windmills.
    "He only earns his freedom and his life Who takes them every day by storm."

    -- Johann Wolfgang von Goethe, German writer and politician
  • snake284snake284 Senior Member Posts: 21,802 Senior Member
    samzhere wrote: »
    So it does appear that the whiners may actually have a point, that lead shot might be an environmental hazard. Which is understandable -- we really didn't wise up to leaded gasoline in the environment, or lead base paint hazards for a long time.

    Understand, I'm clueless on the facts, which is why I started the thread, to learn somethin' new.

    But if lead shot is indeed a hazard (and I'm not saying it is) and if impartial and sharp gun owners come to that conclusion, then it behooves them to get into the front on this and campaign for alternate shot (maybe some sort of super-dense polymer?) and take the issue away from the anti-2A crowd.

    Are there any high tech alternates to steel shot? I don't know that either. But this is maybe an opportunity instead of a detriment -- some smart ammo company (or G&A forumite) figures a non-steel alternate to lead and makes a mint.

    But what makes sense to someone like me, pro-gun but also pro-conservation, is to deny the antis any sort of issue. If in fact lead shot is bad for wildlife (besides getting hit with it, ha ha) then it should be decided impartially and scientifically, not emotionally. Anything we can do to take the "banner" out of the anti-2A crowd is best, I think.

    Thanks again, guys!

    This is not a bad thread Sam. Sometimes we as shooters and hunters need to examine what we do rather than blindly accept everything we do as right and wholesome. What I like about this so far is the more we dig the more right we find our position. The facts speak for themselves, but if we don't examine our opinions we will allow others, agenda driven whackos, the privilege of doing so without question and allowing them the opportunity of injecting their own facts into the mix. This way by proactively policing our own, we keep the other side straight or at least don't allow them the opportunity to drum up untrue charges against us.:up:
    Daddy, what's an enabler?
    Son that's somebody with nothing to do with his time but keep me in trouble with mom.
  • jaywaptijaywapti Senior Member Posts: 4,489 Senior Member
    My thoughts are its a bunch of crap, I don't doubt that ducks & geese will ingest some lead shot, but I think the amount of deaths due to crippled birds far outweighs leap poisoning.
    The Tungsten based Hevi-shot is better than lead, it will extend your shooting range, and hits harder, I know it costs more but IMO its well worth it
    I cant speak for anyone else but I grew up drinking water from leaded pipes, used leaded gas, cast my own sinkers, jigs, dive weights etc. breathed the fumes, and I'm not dead yet.

    JAY
    THE DEFINITION OF GUN CONTROL IS HITTING THE TARGET WITH YOUR FIRST SHOT
  • samzheresamzhere Banned Posts: 10,923 Senior Member
    snake284 wrote: »
    This is not a bad thread Sam. Sometimes we as shooters and hunters need to examine what we do rather than blindly accept everything we do as right and wholesome. What I like about this so far is the more we dig the more right we find our position. The facts speak for themselves, but if we don't examine our opinions we will allow others, agenda driven whackos, the privilege of doing so without question and allowing them the opportunity of injecting their own facts into the mix. This way by proactively policing our own, we keep the other side straight or at least don't allow them the opportunity to drum up untrue charges against us.:up:

    I agree, snake. As I said, I've got zero idea whether the lead is causing environmental problems. It certainly did in paint and car exhausts till that was dealt with.

    What we as gun owners need to do is not automatically lock out any negatives but remain open to the facts. And if the facts do show that lead shot is a hazard, responsible gunners need to take the issue forward, and find alternatives. And by doing so, take another issue away from the rabid anti-2A set.

    I mean, on the SD front, we all generally support sensible laws, such as meaningful background checks and safety laws (send idiots who leave guns accessible to little kids to jail), and so on.

    But as I say, I really don't know the facts. But I DO know that the members here are the best!

    Outside of a dog, a book is a man’s best friend. Inside of a dog, it’s too dark to read. - Groucho Marx
  • KENFU1911KENFU1911 Senior Member Posts: 1,052 Senior Member
    samzhere wrote: »
    But if lead shot is indeed a hazard (and I'm not saying it is) .

    Are there any high tech alternates to steel shot?
    Thanks again, guys!

    Thought I pointed that out Sam .the super Hi Tech Non Toxic shot... much more money to hunt with

    12 Gauge 6 3.25 Shot Type: Lead Velocity (fps): 1290Shell Length: 2.75" Quantity:25 rounds Ounces of Shot:1 O $7.49

    Bismuth Classic Sport Game Shotshells, 1175 fps, #7 Bismuth-Tin Alloy Shot , 10 Rd/bx Price: $20.66
    the non lead has been around for years...better than steel...but 7.49 for 25 ( closer to 5.49 if you shop around) Vs. 20.66 for 10 rounds, can turn rabbit and dove hunting into a rich mans game very fast. Ken



    Price: $20.66
    My idea of a warning shot is when the 2nd bad guy watches his 1st buddy go down....
  • KENFU1911KENFU1911 Senior Member Posts: 1,052 Senior Member
    KENFU1911 wrote: »

    Federal Steel shot for ducks. 12 Gauge 3" 1-7/8 oz. # 4 Regular Price: $9.99
    Hevi Shot non toxic 12 Gauge 3" 1-1/4 oz. # 1 Regular Price: $27.99

    The Hevi shot will kill better than steel, Maybe as well as lead, but at far greater cost to the hunter... Ken

    Again..Ken
    My idea of a warning shot is when the 2nd bad guy watches his 1st buddy go down....
  • TeachTeach Senior Member Posts: 18,254 Senior Member
    Sam, the no-lead ship has sailed a long time ago, and the lying "scientists" and the bureaucrats who control the grant money that keeps them spewing their lies have won. There's about as much junk science out there supporting lead bans as there is now about "climate change", but the lead banners have a couple of decades' head start. It's all a bunch of Bovine Scatology, where any chance of having a rational discussion about the so-called dangers of lead shot, sinkers, solder, and a lot of other lead-based products cannot happen because of the screeching protests of the true believers of all the lies.
    Jerry
    Hide and wail in terror, Eloi- - - -We Morlocks are on the hunt!
    ASK-HOLE Someone who asks for advice and always does something opposite
  • samzheresamzhere Banned Posts: 10,923 Senior Member
    KENFU1911 wrote: »
    Thought I pointed that out Sam .the super Hi Tech Non Toxic shot... much more money to hunt with

    Ah, sorry, I saw the list where your mentioned "super shot" but you didn't say specifically that it was the non toxic specialty -- my bad.

    Thinking that maybe it's like other things, if it becomes prevalent, prices will come down?

    Outside of a dog, a book is a man’s best friend. Inside of a dog, it’s too dark to read. - Groucho Marx
  • Six-GunSix-Gun Senior Member Posts: 7,219 Senior Member
    samzhere wrote: »
    Ah, sorry, I saw the list where your mentioned "super shot" but you didn't say specifically that it was the non toxic specialty -- my bad.

    Thinking that maybe it's like other things, if it becomes prevalent, prices will come down?

    It's doubtful that it would to any substantial degree, Sam. Most of these alternative non-toxics use, by necessity, far more rare industrial metals like tungsten and bismuth to meet the density/carried energy requirements to make for effective shot. They are nowhere near as available as lead or steel and that's reflected, to an eyebrow-raising level, in the sticker price. Unless we find a stash of the alternative stuff big enough to sink prices, none of the alternative shot will ever be economically feasible for the average hunter to consume casually.
    Accuracy: because white space between bullet holes drives me insane.
  • tennmiketennmike Senior Member Posts: 25,727 Senior Member
    If you reload your own shotshells, and I do, there is a HUGE difference in shot prices for both the shot and the extra components to reload the non lead shotshells.

    Lead shot: $49.50/25 lb. bag
    Steel shot: $16/10 lb. bag
    Bismuth shot: $164/6.6 lb bag
    Hevi Shot (powdered tungsten/iron) $153.90/7 lb. bag

    Between the steel, bismuth, and Hevi Shot, steel is the cheapest and sucks like a Hoover with a supercharger for the reasons that Orchidman mentioned. Bismuth and Hevi Shot are good substitutes for lead shot, but are extremely expensive, and those small bags of shot don't go very far considering you're loading more than an ounce per shotshell. And steel shot is not compatible AT ALL in older guns, and can cause some really bad stuck choke tube problems if you choose the wrong type choke tube( the incompressible steel shot will swell the threaded choke tube portion of the choke tube into the barrel threads making removal of choke tube impossible).
    Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup.


  • samzheresamzhere Banned Posts: 10,923 Senior Member
    I'm wondering whether there's been any attempt to create non-metallic alternates, such as a high density polymer? I know there are some very dense polymers and that might be a good way to go -- of course it would take some research.

    Outside of a dog, a book is a man’s best friend. Inside of a dog, it’s too dark to read. - Groucho Marx
  • NNNN Senior Member Posts: 23,889 Senior Member
    samzhere wrote: »
    I'm wondering whether there's been any attempt to create non-metallic alternates, such as a high density polymer? I know there are some very dense polymers and that might be a good way to go -- of course it would take some research.
    After seeing your post, I tried to find some info on it.

    It just seemed it just made stronger items not necessarily heaver as needed for shot.
    A Veteran is someone that served in the Military, it does not matter where they served.
  • BigslugBigslug Senior Member Posts: 6,941 Senior Member
    samzhere wrote: »
    Ah, sorry, I saw the list where your mentioned "super shot" but you didn't say specifically that it was the non toxic specialty -- my bad.

    Thinking that maybe it's like other things, if it becomes prevalent, prices will come down?

    All metallic elements are made in exploding stars. Believe me when I say you DO NOT want them to become more prevalent!

    Cheaper is going to require easy to find, easy to dig, and easy to process. Lead, thus far, is all we've got that most can afford to literally blow away. . .
    WWJMBD?

    "Nothing is safe from stupid." - Zee
  • RazorbackerRazorbacker Senior Member Posts: 4,646 Senior Member
    I've casually followed this thread. Is this some new push to further ban lead or has Sam just now stumbled across the original ban from years ago?
    Teach your children to love guns, they'll never be able to afford drugs
  • snake284snake284 Senior Member Posts: 21,802 Senior Member
    When I quit waterfowl hunting back in the 80s there were no popular lead replacements. All we could hunt with was steel. I adapted to it. I used an improved Cylinder choke instead of modified or full. I found this patterned very well and was deadly out to 35-40 yards in a 3" Chambered 12 gauge. Steel can pattern better than lead with the right choke because it doesn't deform. Improved Cylinder is the way to go with steel. it patterns better and while it still doesn't kill at the ranges that lead will, it will still kill reasonably well. This is some consolationm but I have always had my doubts as to the validity of the no lead argument and think we got the shaft on this deal. I still believe the ultimate goal of the no lead crew is the stoppage of all hunting and the repeal of the second amendment. I hate these Commie ****.
    Daddy, what's an enabler?
    Son that's somebody with nothing to do with his time but keep me in trouble with mom.
  • snake284snake284 Senior Member Posts: 21,802 Senior Member
    I've casually followed this thread. Is this some new push to further ban lead or has Sam just now stumbled across the original ban from years ago?

    Where as the anti lead crowd hasn't made any big gains lately, other than places like California (Just too many whacko freak Environmentalist there), they haven't given up yet and we must be forever vigilant because they are always out there looking for a way to get something else banned.
    Daddy, what's an enabler?
    Son that's somebody with nothing to do with his time but keep me in trouble with mom.
  • TeachTeach Senior Member Posts: 18,254 Senior Member
    I've casually followed this thread. Is this some new push to further ban lead or has Sam just now stumbled across the original ban from years ago?

    Sam's always a few decades behind the power curve. The lead-ban freaks have been at it for several years, so it's possible something new has come up, but not very likely.
    Jerry
    Hide and wail in terror, Eloi- - - -We Morlocks are on the hunt!
    ASK-HOLE Someone who asks for advice and always does something opposite
  • wildgenewildgene Senior Member Posts: 1,036 Senior Member
    Teach wrote: »
    Sam's always a few decades behind the power curve. The lead-ban freaks have been at it for several years, so it's possible something new has come up, but not very likely.
    Jerry

    ...the "Something New" is KA's new push for "non-toxic" ammo & a complete ban of lead across the state, including rifle & pistol rounds, expanding the existing "Condor Areas" into a statewide ban...

    ..."raw lead" is covered by a heavy layer of oxidation, making it almost impossible to be absorbed into the blood stream, gaseous lead, like in an indoor shooting range or lead compounds are a lot more dangerous, but even they require long, continuous exposure. By comparison, one idiot trying to clean up one of the new govt. mandated light bulbs that contain mercury can absorb enough of it thru the skin to become "mad as a hatter"...
  • Big ChiefBig Chief Senior Member Posts: 32,978 Senior Member
    So what are the Environuts complaining about..............simple........ hunters use lead................kill animals............animals eaten by hunters/family................if it's all true the hunters and their families will all die off from lead posioning! No more hunters and the world will be a Hunky Dory place. :tooth:
    It's only true if it's on this forum where opinions are facts and facts are opinions
    Words of wisdom from Big Chief: Flush twice, it's a long way to the Mess Hall
    I'd rather have my sister work in a whorehouse than own another Taurus!
  • samzheresamzhere Banned Posts: 10,923 Senior Member
    I've casually followed this thread. Is this some new push to further ban lead or has Sam just now stumbled across the original ban from years ago?

    Article in the latest NRA mag about the ban efforts prompted my post. And yes, Teach and others, I'm well aware of this situation that's been ongoing for years. But this NEW ARTICLE in the NRA mag set me to thinking and I wanted to get the straight skinny, which always is found here.

    Outside of a dog, a book is a man’s best friend. Inside of a dog, it’s too dark to read. - Groucho Marx
  • MississippiBoyMississippiBoy Senior Member Posts: 819 Senior Member
    I remember reading a study somebody did about the environmental impact of lead shot in the United States due to migratory bird hunting. They published the numbers of how many shot they found in one area, and it was an astronomical amount of lead for the size of the area they sampled. I don't remember the details at all, but it was some incredible number of pounds per cubic foot of soil. They used that as "proof" that lead shot needs to be banned/strictly regulated, since they found so much deadly lead in one area.
    As it turns out, the area they studied (and they knew this going in) had been an active clay pigeon shooting range for years and years before shutting down. So there had been thousands of people in one fairly small area shooting hundreds of times each over the course of 10/15/20? years.
    Great study....
«134
Sign In or Register to comment.
Magazine Cover

GET THE MAGAZINE Subscribe & Save

Temporary Price Reduction

SUBSCRIBE NOW

Give a Gift   |   Subscriber Services

PREVIEW THIS MONTH'S ISSUE

GET THE NEWSLETTER Join the List and Never Miss a Thing.

Get the top Guns & Ammo stories delivered right to your inbox every week.