The following paper was published in December 2024:
Spatial and temporal variation in the prevalence of illegal lead shot in reared and wild mallards harvested in England
The use of lead shotgun ammunition for shooting wildfowl has been restricted in England since 1999, but surveys finding lead shot in harvested birds s…
www.sciencedirect.com
Fair enough.
I did have a quick read throu it.
1 thing i do know it is amazing how often studies find in favour off whos ever is paying for their reseach or confirms there pre concived bias esp in emotive subjects like this.
Basc and others need to go throu any studies like this with a fine tooth comb everything from thier null hypothesis to methodology.
If its going to be used agaibst us it atleast much be valid
I dont shoot in eng so not really sure how well its followed but i would off thought more than 25% would of made the switch.
It does surprise me the number is just so high.
1 thing i will say they seem to sample 100- 150 ducks each year.
And from that there getting regionally differences as well.
They can only be buying a few ducks in each region, not really a massive sample size.
If only buying from 1 or 2 game dealers it could easy only be 1 or 2 shoots supplying them.
Would be pretty easy to skew that if u already had a bias or agenda.
Im not saying it doesnae go on but i dont believe its as high as 75%.
If u do believe lead pellets in food is a big problem its easily sorted.
Game dealers just need to say non toxic only and threaten to fine them or not take there game in future.
Shoots provide shells for the guns.
A shoot i pick up on has went non toxic, it just provides the shells add that on to the price of a bird.
Its in scotland so strictly no legal need to be non toxic, but game deqler wants birds shot with non toxic for his markets. Which is fair enough hes buying them so his rules.
Simple and no need for all this legisaltion.