Lead ammunition

ALLHONE hunting knives designed and made in NZ
K

kes

Well-Known Member
This has been a contentious issue for quite while now.
BASC's position (as with other ORG's ) was " no evidence - no change", F.A.C.E. are resisting the restriction on the use of lead shot.
The new BASC Chairman's Eoghan Cameron recent statement seems to change that -

“Shooting goes hand-in-hand with conservation and as part of that, perhaps now is the time to start looking more carefully at sustainable ammunition. It is time to bust the myths and open our eyes to the inevitability of a future in which the use of lead shot is placed under greater examination."

I think this might be called a change so is there new evidence, or is this just the Chairmans view, perhaps unwisely given - bearing in mind RSPB/LAG/SWIFT .
Have I missed something ?
I have noticed David answers none of the questions about JR apart from saying the advice was not to. There are a lot of questions in this thread without answers studiously avoided I think - so will this get an answer?
I note that the restrictions placed on 'another' forum mean they have quoted SD's thread for PW's to view the debate about medicals.
If you look under 'general shooting matters' you can find several 'lets stick together' quotes - 'not the time to argue amongst ourselves' etc quite where BASC develop its strategy from is a loss to me since on the LAG alone they lost members who said they had 'broken faith' the Chairman must be aware of the strategic outcomes of the organisation he chairs you would think.
 
kes said:
This has been a contentious issue for quite while now.
BASC's position (as with other ORG's ) was " no evidence - no change", F.A.C.E. are resisting the restriction on the use of lead shot.
The new BASC Chairman's Eoghan Cameron recent statement seems to change that -

“Shooting goes hand-in-hand with conservation and as part of that, perhaps now is the time to start looking more carefully at sustainable ammunition. It is time to bust the myths and open our eyes to the inevitability of a future in which the use of lead shot is placed under greater examination."

I think this might be called a change so is there new evidence, or is this just the Chairmans view, perhaps unwisely given - bearing in mind RSPB/LAG/SWIFT .
Have I missed something ?
I have noticed David answers none of the questions about JR apart from saying the advice was not to. There are a lot of questions in this thread without answers studiously avoided I think - so will this get an answer?
I note that the restrictions placed on 'another' forum mean they have quoted SD's thread for PW's to view the debate about medicals.
If you look under 'general shooting matters' you can find several 'lets stick together' quotes - 'not the time to argue amongst ourselves' etc quite where BASC develop its strategy from is a loss to me since on the LAG alone they lost members who said they had 'broken faith' the Chairman must be aware of the strategic outcomes of the organisation he chairs you would think.
Click to expand...

Kes there's another Gloucester old spot just flown round my chimney. This is about as likely as BASC doing anything or giving straight answers.
It won't be long before lead " bullets" are outlawed.
As I use an unusual calibre I have already swapped to tin as I have to order quite a number on a fairly lengthy delivery.
To hope that discussion or constructive criticism will get the "Voice of shooting" to challenge things is like believing you will go out and shoot a gold medal buck every day. They are and have been for a long while as useful as tits on a bull.
 
I think BASC see the ban on lead in shot and ammunition as an argument they will have great difficulty to win (what ever a win looks like) and hence the apparent change in attitude and the softening up of the shooters via articles in the BASC and other magazines.

In the ban of lead the challenges the sport face are evidence based and probably outside the control of the UK government originating as far as I know from within the EU, what is not is the constant rejection of a JR over the medical reports.

enjoy your shooting whilst we still can.
 
I tend, I think to look at this a bit simplistically.

1. Wild animals/birds simply don't live long enough to develop lead poisoning.
2. Lead ammunition is denser that most alternatives and so gives more immediate kills, so is more humane. Especially with shotgun cartridges.
3. It's cheaper than effective alternatives.
4. A large proportion of the population live happily with running water delivered to their homes through Victorian lead piping.

I'm probably missing something important though and need a good talking to by Greta Thumbsucker or someone to modify my views.
 
Pedro said:
I tend, I think to look at this a bit simplistically.

1. Wild animals/birds simply don't live long enough to develop lead poisoning.
2. Lead ammunition is denser that most alternatives and so gives more immediate kills, so is more humane. Especially with shotgun cartridges.
3. It's cheaper than effective alternatives.
4. A large proportion of the population live happily with running water delivered to their homes through Victorian lead piping.

I'm probably missing something important though and need a good talking to by Greta Thumbsucker or someone to modify my views.
Click to expand...
Like your thinking but
1) was lead poisoning in wildfowl the reason lead was banned for wildfowling?
2) true
3) true but is steel not cheaper per ton than lead so steel shot should be cheaper
4) not anymore apparently their is no lead pipe in use any more all been replaced.

as much as I keep resisting I will very soon try some steel shot cartridges.
 
1) Dunno.
2) We agree!
3) Steel shot is not overly expensive, true but compared to lead is pants. EFFECTIVE alternatives range from more expensive to a re-mortgage.
4) Damn! A good argument shot down. With lead!
 
Pedro said:
1) Dunno.
2) We agree!
3) Steel shot is not overly expensive, true but compared to lead is pants. EFFECTIVE alternatives range from more expensive to a re-mortgage.
4) Damn! A good argument shot down. With lead!
Click to expand...

Ref your point #3.

28-bore lead: £289/1000.
28-bore bismuth: £1,169/1000.

Best,

Carl
 
I am a well known cynic and wonder who or what benefits from the eventual demise of lead.
Since wildfowl have used the duck ponds used by bred ducks for a hundred years - not many seem to have died of lead poisoning in my researching.
I have shot with both and the direct cost, and indirect costs (guns etc) are much much higher with steel and it is a poor alternative ballistically. Bismuth 'balls' in the case, tungsten matrix is great but horrendously expensive. Stalking appears to be making a transition with no ill effects, single shot.
The only benefit that is a 'true' benefit seems to accrue to 'who' rather than 'what'.
Fertile ground for a cynic.
 
Liveonce said:
Like your thinking but
1) was lead poisoning in wildfowl the reason lead was banned for wildfowling?
2) true
3) true but is steel not cheaper per ton than lead so steel shot should be cheaper
4) not anymore apparently their is no lead pipe in use any more all been replaced.

as much as I keep resisting I will very soon try some steel shot cartridges.
Click to expand...

Your quote 4 is actually incorrect. I am qualified and have building services responsibilities for 7000 social housing properties and can confirm many still have lead mains water supplies to their properties. Water utilities have replaced their mains supplies in many areas. However, the property supply from the suppliers stop tap on the boundary/pathway to the incoming water supply stop tap in the property is in many cases still lead.
 
Rather more telling when there is considerable proof that the compounds of lead formed by water in contact with lead pipes leads to restricted development in the very young. - teens and adults are unaffected - taps should always be run in the morning for a while if you suspect you have a lead supply and young kids.
 
We don't just ingest lead from water running through lead pipes. Water picks up elements of lead when it falls on lead roofs, flashings and valleys etc. The same way water picks up calcium when rain falls on limestone hills surrounding reservoir's, In this case we then call it hard water.
 
I chatted to a member of the BASC headquarters team before Christmas. ( discussion made due to a request from me for BASC to stand up for the shooter - rifle and shotgun, not just roll over and take it all the time ).. I believe the BASC team member was head of Publicity/PR etc etc, in the general discussion the topic of lead shot arose and it was immediately apparent that BASC have no intention of resisting a lead ban. In fact, I was semi lectured that the answer for the future was steel shot for shotguns and copper bullets for rifles. As a "retired" mech engineer I tried in vain to put over the fact that steel in the majority of older shotgun barrels was not a good idea ( for many reasons ). But the BASC director was having none of it. From that point I knew that BASC is a no hope tor stand up for the retention of lead in shot and bullet. In addition, I asked why BASC were not pushing the shotgun cartridge manufacturers to work on reducing the price of the alternatives such as Tungsten matrix - Bismuth - Heavy shot etc. and showing the shooters they were trying to do this... I received a stony silence, followed by another comment that steel was for shotguns.. From this point I gave up trying to voice a view, as it was apparent he was not listening!!. This is something BASC seems to do a lot, not listen to the shooter!... Overall I found the hour long conversation quite depressing and I wonder frequently why I have bothered to renew my membership.
 
Triumph_Dave said:
I chatted to a member of the BASC headquarters team before Christmas. ( discussion made due to a request from me for BASC to stand up for the shooter - rifle and shotgun, not just roll over and take it all the time ).. I believe the BASC team member was head of Publicity/PR etc etc, in the general discussion the topic of lead shot arose and it was immediately apparent that BASC have no intention of resisting a lead ban. In fact, I was semi lectured that the answer for the future was steel shot for shotguns and copper bullets for rifles. As a "retired" mech engineer I tried in vain to put over the fact that steel in the majority of older shotgun barrels was not a good idea ( for many reasons ). But the BASC director was having none of it. From that point I knew that BASC is a no hope tor stand up for the retention of lead in shot and bullet. In addition, I asked why BASC were not pushing the shotgun cartridge manufacturers to work on reducing the price of the alternatives such as Tungsten matrix - Bismuth - Heavy shot etc. and showing the shooters they were trying to do this... I received a stony silence, followed by another comment that steel was for shotguns.. From this point I gave up trying to voice a view, as it was apparent he was not listening!!. This is something BASC seems to do a lot, not listen to the shooter!... Overall I found the hour long conversation quite depressing and I wonder frequently why I have bothered to renew my membership.
Click to expand...
Dave,

The BASC magazine (which I enjoy, as it is a quality piece of work) now has an obvious anti-lead agenda. Sometimes, there are three or four anti-lead / pro-steel articles / editorials in the same issue. I challenged Conor O'Gorman about it on here (the bloke who called @kes a racist) and he denied that BASC has any such agenda.

More and more, BASC are being used either as a co-conspirator or as a 'useful fool' in order to manage shooters in any given direction. @riddick described the phenomenon on here somewhere recently.

Personally, I am close to my limit of this nonsense. I struggle to contribute to these shooting-politics threads any more because I just get too annoyed.

Regards,

Carl
 
One cannot characterise BASC anymore as the "Voice of Shooting" on lead alone they are not representing their members - that I can guarantee so why are they doing this ?
Are there many SWIFT supporters at BASC still ?

Why anyone trusts them I no longer know - the list of foul-up's and failures grows monthly - Swift, Ali, Lead, Medicals, GL, Police visits, I wish all you supporters saw the writing on the wall and resigned - thats all BASC recognises.

I no longer wonder why BASC tried the political route - they didnt, they "hoped". Our future will not be there if one simply HOPES.
Change Org, demand amalgamation and a single voice for shooting. Leave BASC to fiddle whilst shooting burns.
Carl, I know how you feel but I will carry on until we get someone at BASC who knows whom they represent and why, unless they are down to the last few diehards by then.
 
Personally I don't have an emotional attachment to lead ammunition, but surely the best argument against its use is if an affordable, more environmentally friendly, ballistically superior exists. This is really something for the R & D & marketing depts. of the ammunition manufacturers to come up with and certainly not any TV celebrities contracted to the BBC
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Reading between the lines is s2 to s2 already decided?
Replies
1
Views
280
M@tt
M
  • Locked
Lead ammunition restrictions - government announcement
53 54 55
Replies
1K
Views
44K
sikamalc
sikamalc
  • Locked
Lead - EU Reach Meeting/Proposal
10 11 12
Replies
236
Views
5K
Smellydog
Smellydog
BASC FAQs on lead ammunition restrictions
Replies
0
Views
237
Conor O'Gorman
C
Separate limits for acquisition and possession of ammunition
Replies
0
Views
378
Elshad
E
Leica Fortis 6 - Bright and powerful.
Back
Top