Lead ammunition - BASC statement in response to RSPB and WWT open letter

[25 Sharps]

The trouble with lead bullets is that on hitting an animal there is enough energy that the lead melts and then you have a column of molten sprayed into the caracass. Some of the lead will harden into lead fragments that we can find. Much will end as microscopic particles that are very easily ingested. Some of the bullet will remain in one piece and exit. How much? Well it very much depends on the type of bullet. A typical hollow nose ballistic tipped Varmint type bullet from a 22 centrefire probably most of its lead into a fox as there is minimal exit wound.

A typical cup and core stalking bullet will retain about 60 to 70% and a tough bonded core bullet a bit more.

A monolithic copper bullet works very differently. Copper has a much high melting point than lead, so it won’t melt on impact. The petals open up and you then have a flat nose spinning device cutting through the body tissues, severing and impact major blood vessels and CNS before exiting. A monolithic bullet will retain 95% of its mass, and if does shed particles those are easily seen.

Microscopic lead particles are easily ingested when meat is eaten. And in many cases, given that meat is acidic, they will be partially dissolved into lead salts before they are eaten. In any case stomach acid will dissolve lead and thus it is then adsorbed into the body. There is plenty of good science that clearly demonstrates that lead in the body is not good for you or wild birds etc.

Birds are particularly effected because they don’t have teeth. Instead they have a crop which Is a large muscular organ at the base of the throat. They ingest grit and crop is used to grind up the food. Lead shot etc remains in the crop where it too is ground up. A lead pellet will pretty much stay in the crop until it is ground away.

At least with an animal a lead pellet will probably only remain in the body for several hours as it passes through the digestive tract and is then pooed out. But it’s surface will be digested.

In man, there is now plenty of evidence that demonstrates that lead levels as low 25 nmols per litre of blood is enough to be implicated in leukaemia and other nasty cancers.

The Food Standards Agency opening stance on game meat is that it contains lead and is thus potentially harmful. Have a read here. Lead-shot game

They state that this advice is based on a sample of consumers in Scotland carried out in 2012 who had eaten game consistently.

So where at the studies showing lead bullets have impact on bird species, in the UK, at population level.

 

[Heym SR20]

but surly most of that 1500 joules of energy transfers to the target not the projectile after all that is the whole point of it, is it not.

Equal and opposite reactions and the sight of the transfer involves huge amounts of energy - a lot will be heat - but given the fluid nature of body materials the heat will be quickly dissipated.

 

[Heym SR20]

So where at the studies showing lead bullets have impact on bird species, in the UK, at population level.

The nature of science is that it doesn’t matter where the studies are done. There is plenty of good science done elsewhere on the impact of lead on populations of birds. The most important was done in California on Condors many years ago.

 

[Ratel]

Come on, chaps - when has anyone ever used lead salts for curing pork?

Who said anything about lead salts. Lead salting trough was a wooden box 6" deep and lead lined.
Put pork and bacon in it and pour salt over it and rub in.

 

[Whitefront]

Judging by your photo, you must have enjoyed it...!

 

[terrier1]

Absolutely fed up reading all this crap.
The outcome of banning lead. Will be a lot less people shooting which will mean less members for the shooting organisations gun shops closing the value of some of the guns we use will drop through the floor.
But the real disappointment thing is the shooting organisations are all for it.
THE TERM NAIL IN COFFIN COMES TO MIND.

 

[Dalua]

Who said anything about lead salts.

HeymSR20 in post 154.

 

[25 Sharps]

The nature of science is that it doesn’t matter where the studies are done. There is plenty of good science done elsewhere on the impact of lead on populations of birds. The most important was done in California on Condors many years ago.

But the location does, the California Condors studies are not applicable in the UK.

Firstly Condors are vultures, we do not have any species of vulture in the UK.

Secondly the habitats are different, ecological niche is different, available food sources vary greatly.

Again, if raptors scavenging animals shot with lead bullets is an issue then why are buzzard and kite populations increasing year on year?

If lead shot game was an issue for these two scavenging species then why are they not noticeably declining, as the condors did?

You can’t just conveniently use a study to confirm an argument because there are some vague similarities. That is most definitely not science!

 

[Ratel]

HeymSR20 in post 154.

Oh he's just s scaredy cat.

 

[Dunwaters]

Right, but what about lead bullets?

I’m fairly sure that came from EU REACH, they referred the lead ammo issue to the sub group which was dealing with it with the advice that since the safe level of lead was zero, policy was to remove it from use.
That’s the science bit that’s been driving the calls for a total ban.

 

[spanner]

But the location does, the California Condors studies are not applicable in the UK.

Firstly Condors are vultures, we do not have any species of vulture in the UK.

Secondly the habitats are different, ecological niche is different, available food sources vary greatly.

Again, if raptors scavenging animals shot with lead bullets is an issue then why are buzzard and kite populations increasing year on year?

If lead shot game was an issue for these two scavenging species then why are they not noticeably declining, as the condors did?

You can’t just conveniently use a study to confirm an argument because there are some vague similarities. That is most definitely not science!

I shoot Pigeons on a large Commercial Game shoot and Buzzards and Kites are absolutely rife. They must be eating large quantities of Lead Shot Game and Pigeons from winged birds so totally agree.

 

[25 Sharps]

I’m fairly sure that came from EU REACH, they referred the lead ammo issue to the sub group which was dealing with it with the advice that since the safe level of lead was zero, policy was to remove it from use.
That’s the science bit that’s been driving the calls for a total ban.

But we’re not in the EU any more, partly for this reason

 

[Conor O'Gorman]

The science worldwide consistently shows that lead ammunition has measurable impacts on wildlife, people and the environment. The evidence increases annually. The Game and Wildlife Conservation Trust has reviewed the science and its assessment is here:

Lead Ammunition - Game and Wildlife Conservation Trust

I would recommend the following article from Shooting Times on what happens when small or large game is shot with lead ammunition – and food for thought on the implications for our health. (you have to add your email address but it’s worth doing so to read this article)

Toxic ammunition: Barry Stoffell investigates the truth about lead

Also have a look at this overview from across the water

Lead in hunted meat: Who’s telling hunters and their families?

We all have different individual views on the science and I guess we tend to each believe/agree with what we read or hear or watch through the personal lens of our own world views and experience – when our peers start changing their view this can also be influential – all of that’s being human.

However, one could argue that the opinion that perhaps matters most right now is what the Health and Safety Executive’s view is of the science and other information it gathered from last year’s call for evidence.

So, what restrictions will be proposed sometime in the next 2 weeks for England, Wales and Scotland? Is it going to be a full ban on all outdoor uses of lead ammunition (i.e. all target and live quarry shooting for airguns, shotguns, pistols, rifles and all manner of historic firearms) or will it be a ban limited to the use of some types of lead shot for gamebird shooting?

What science will be used to justify these proposals in the context of the uses of lead ammunition in England, Wales and Scotland and the risks those uses pose for wildlife, people, and the environment – what should we challenge and what should we accept?

The public consultation will be a chance for every one us to give our feedback.

Given similar policy developments in the EU following the same processes taking place here we may see the Health and Safety Executive going much further than game shooting and recommend a ban on the sale and use of nearly all lead ammunition for target shooting and live quarry shooting outdoors.

In that scenario the shooting organisations will need to seek exemptions where there is evidence that there are no viable alternatives to lead, where socio-economic factors mean a transition isn’t appropriate and for situations where lead can continue to be used in settings that present negligible or no risk to wildlife, the environment or human health.

So, for example, exemptions might be needed for airgun pellets, rifle calibres smaller than 6.5mm, various shotgun bores and historic firearms for live quarry shooting; and various exemptions for the multitude of modern and historic firearms used in target shooting.

Where evidence-based, proportionate restrictions are proposed, it will be critical that appropriate transition periods are secured. The timelines must be realistic and guided by the shooting sector to ensure that the range of products and their supply can meet market demands.

The restriction proposals published in the next 2 weeks and the 6 months of consultation that follows is not the end of the UK REACH process. That is the first stage – looking namely at the risks and the proposed restrictions that may reduce those risks. There will follow a socio-economic assessment of those proposals, which will be consulted on. Thereafter, a report goes to the Secretary of State next year. And therein begins an unpredictable political phase.

 

[Heym SR20]

i really don’t see banning lead stopping people shooting. It may change things a bit, but is the cost of cartridges really going to stop game and clay shooting. Much more of an impact will be general cost of living in particular on fuel and general availability of cash to fund recreational pursuits. Personally I don’t do much big day driven shooting, mainly because you get little change out £1,000 for a days shooting, especially if you have added in a night away in an inn, travel and a few extra meals etc.

As for rise in raptor numbers this has been down reintroductions and the linking of farm subsidies to biodiversity and loss of subsidies if you or your employees are caught harming birds of prey.

20 years ago hooked beaked crows were pretty much shot on the orders of the boss.

Loss of a few tens of thousands of pounds is a big disincentive to carry on such behaviour. And for modern keepers, criminal record and loss of firearms equals end of career.

As for buzzards being buzzards, kites being kites and vultures being vultures, they all eat a lot of carrion, all have very acidic stomachs and all pretty similar physiologically.

But of course there are massive physiological differences between UK Roe and Fallow deer, rabbits and hares, to the North American White Tail, Black Tail and Mule Deer, so earing a lead shot mule deer in California is totally different to eating a lead shot Fallow in Sussex.

But as we do know the Red Deer of UK is very close to Sika Deer and North American Wapati or Elk, so much so that where they have been introduced to each other they will breed and produce fertile offspring.

But of course there must be such a difference in their diet that a lead shot elk in California will poison a condor, but a lead shot red deer will have no effect on white tailed sea eagles or golden eagles or buzzards in the UK.

And of course Golden Eagles, Buzzards and Kites found in the UK are totally different to those found in North America.

 

[Heym SR20]

The science worldwide consistently shows that lead ammunition has measurable impacts on wildlife, people and the environment. The evidence increases annually. The Game and Wildlife Conservation Trust has reviewed the science and its assessment is here:

Lead Ammunition - Game and Wildlife Conservation Trust

I would recommend the following article from Shooting Times on what happens when small or large game is shot with lead ammunition – and food for thought on the implications for our health. (you have to add your email address but it’s worth doing so to read this article)

Toxic ammunition: Barry Stoffell investigates the truth about lead

Also have a look at this overview from across the water

Lead in hunted meat: Who’s telling hunters and their families?

We all have different individual views on the science and I guess we tend to each believe/agree with what we read or hear or watch through the personal lens of our own world views and experience – when our peers start changing their view this can also be influential – all of that’s being human.

However, one could argue that the opinion that perhaps matters most right now is what the Health and Safety Executive’s view is of the science and other information it gathered from last year’s call for evidence.

So, what restrictions will be proposed sometime in the next 2 weeks for England, Wales and Scotland? Is it going to be a full ban on all outdoor uses of lead ammunition (i.e. all target and live quarry shooting for airguns, shotguns, pistols, rifles and all manner of historic firearms) or will it be a ban limited to the use of some types of lead shot for gamebird shooting?

What science will be used to justify these proposals in the context of the uses of lead ammunition in England, Wales and Scotland and the risks those uses pose for wildlife, people, and the environment – what should we challenge and what should we accept?

The public consultation will be a chance for every one us to give our feedback.

Given similar policy developments in the EU following the same processes taking place here we may see the Health and Safety Executive going much further than game shooting and recommend a ban on the sale and use of nearly all lead ammunition for target shooting and live quarry shooting outdoors.

In that scenario the shooting organisations will need to seek exemptions where there is evidence that there are no viable alternatives to lead, where socio-economic factors mean a transition isn’t appropriate and for situations where lead can continue to be used in settings that present negligible or no risk to wildlife, the environment or human health.

So, for example, exemptions might be needed for airgun pellets, rifle calibres smaller than 6.5mm, various shotgun bores and historic firearms for live quarry shooting; and various exemptions for the multitude of modern and historic firearms used in target shooting.

Where evidence-based, proportionate restrictions are proposed, it will be critical that appropriate transition periods are secured. The timelines must be realistic and guided by the shooting sector to ensure that the range of products and their supply can meet market demands.

The restriction proposals published in the next 2 weeks and the 6 months of consultation that follows is not the end of the UK REACH process. That is the first stage – looking namely at the risks and the proposed restrictions that may reduce those risks. There will follow a socio-economic assessment of those proposals, which will be consulted on. Thereafter, a report goes to the Secretary of State next year. And therein begins an unpredictable political phase.

A very good and measured response - unlike mine

Lead in petrol is a good example of an exemption. There is a specific exemption that allows up to 5% of petrol sold to be leaded for use in historic vehicles and aviation fuel for old piston engined aircraft.

I would suggest similar exemptions for historic firearms (easy to see via proof marks) and small calibres with appropriate authority being granted to acquire such ammunition.

 

[Liveonce]

i really don’t see banning lead stopping people shooting. It may change things a bit, but is the cost of cartridges really going to stop game and clay shooting.

I think you may be in for a big shock a total ban on lead, without sensible exemptions will be a massive hit on shooting.

Cartridges at £400, £500, £600 a thousand may not cause much pain on game shooters, who probably shoot very little in comparison to clays shooters, clay shooters will feel the pain, many who shoot weekly will not be able to afford £70, £80 ,£100 every week, so demand will fall for clay cartridges the very products which keep a lot of business open.
Clay cartridges account for millions sold every month lose that market and where is that lost revenue coming from?

 

[Heym SR20]

I think you may be in for a big shock a total ban on lead, without sensible exemptions will be a massive hit on shooting.

Cartridges at £400, £500, £600 a thousand may not cause much pain on game shooters, who probably shoot very little in comparison to clays shooters, clay shooters will feel the pain, many who shoot weekly will not be able to afford £70, £80 ,£100 every week, so demand will fall for clay cartridges the very products which keep a lot of business open.
Clay cartridges account for millions sold every month lose that market and where is that lost revenue coming from?

But I am afraid you are not comparing like with like. If you take 28g 30g game cartridges and compare them with game steel cartridges they are already on a par with each other. Most game cartridges are now £90 to £110 per 250, whether they are lead or steel.

Lead clay loads are typically 21 or 24g of shot and come in at around £70 to £80 per 250. With a steel cartridge you would need smaller and less shot than what you need for shooting game.

There would also be the simple matter of economies of scale.

 

[Liveonce]

But I am afraid you are not comparing like with like. If you take 28g 30g game cartridges and compare them with game steel cartridges they are already on a par with each other. Most game cartridges are now £90 to £110 per 250, whether they are lead or steel.

Lead clay loads are typically 21 or 24g of shot and come in at around £70 to £80 per 250. With a steel cartridge you would need smaller and less shot than what you need for shooting game.

There would also be the simple matter of economies of scale.

clearly you do very little clay shooting, for English sporting the most popular lead cartridge load is 28gm not 21gm or 24gm, The 24gm and 21gm were generally used if recoil sensitive, recently some 26gm loads have appeared driven by the increasing costs of the 28gm loads. The 28gm load is the backbone of English sporting, not sure about trap disciplines. At a registered shoot you would find very few would use anything less than the 28gm.

This economies of scales is a myth, the industry is already a massive numbers game, you don’t get a discount on components just because you buy a million and one rather than a million, we are talking those sorts of numbers per order as business as usual. margins are very small, the profit is in the volume.

Then I firmly believe their will be insufficient steel shot to meet demand, so will the price go down? if so that will go against all economic principles. Look at the price of steel today due to the shortage of supply capacity due to the Ukraine war steel has gone up in price as much as 300%

You really should spend a day visiting a cartridge manufacture, it would be an eye opener for you, at perk time expect them to be making around 3 or 4 million cartridges a month.

edit to add most game cartridges are 32gm of lead shot, some more especially high bird shoots where 40gm plus will be used.

it is already being discussed on a clay shooting forum regarding current cartridge prices before any lead ban,
one comment sums it all up:

The way prices are soaring for clays, cartridges and fuel, you`ll be down to shooting 50 birds soon

 

[Dunwaters]

But we’re not in the EU any more, partly for this reason

Jeezus man but you’re relentless.
The lead ammunition group had been quietly ticking over for about 30 years, every time they came up with a proposal for change, every single state in the EU except possibly Denmark and Norway would appeal it or refuse to ratify.
The lack of progress ****ed a lot of people off.
So we had the WHO (or could have been REACH), pop up with the scientifically proven and peer reviewed fact that there was no such thing as a safe level of lead ( they also decided that theres no safe level of alcohol consumption, but one step at a time)
REACH officially asked the Lead ammunition sub group to review their findings given the zero safe level of lead recommendation, and with reference to the environmental effects and effects on human health.
They were also advised that Zero lead , including ammunition, was now EU policy.
The big change here is the word “ POLICY”.
The EU is now officially mandating a lead ammunition free zone ASAP.
Having dandered along without much effect for 30 years, that memo lit a fire under the ammo groups asses which is why we’re all dealing with a very much accelerated program now.
You guys have left the EU, but the basic rules of toxicology haven’t been changed by that move , the official policy is “ no safe level of lead”, what would die of Latvian lead will die of the same quantity of Irish or British lead.
This is the driver for the lead ban, it doesn’t matter where you live on the planet or what your personal beliefs are, this is now dogma, just the same as climate change, gender fluidity and the Easter Bunny are now not to be argued against or screwed with.
The actual physical effects of lead are secondary to the POLICY, which is a ban .
Now lets talk about the” B “ word,( Brexit).
You’ve left the Residents Association but your still living in the same house, on the same street, with the same neighbours. Some of them are ****ed off because you signed up to a few agreements when you first joined and a lot of them are still valid but you want to change them, without any reference to the neighbours.
You can do whatever you like inside your own gaff, but you can’t do sh1t that affects the rest of the neighbourhood without the neighbours agreement, and that includes exposing migratory birds to lead after the rest of us have stopped, or feeding lead contaminated produce to the rest of us just because you don’t think that it matters or that lead behaves differently in the UK to the rest of the universe.
The more I read on this site the more I become convinced that Britain isn’t just a country, its a state of mind, and not always a healthy one.
Its a very infectious condition, theres a lot of it here too.
I can’t wait til we start the debate on the Zero alcohol policy……I have yeast and sugar, copper pipe and space.

 

[Liveonce]

was no such thing as a safe level of lead ( they also decided that theres no safe level of alcohol consumption, but one step at a time)

Just possibly they could save far more human lives by banning alcohol rather than lead, but that is never going to happen as political suicid.


The more I read on this site the more I become convinced that Britain isn’t just a country, its a state of mind.
Its a very infectious condition, theres a lot of it here too.

Change will happen, lead will go, but a total ban however will impact on shooting in virtually all its forms, hence the resistance to change.

would you give up, sacrifice your sport to save the planet, or just happy if someone else is force to do that for you?