Conor O'Gorman
Well-Known Member
Perhaps you could provide some examples?My challenges to those proposals were undermined, however, by you lot failing to challenge things you ought to have challenged and instead accepting as valid things which, at best, were spurious.
This was made even worse by the completely delusional decision to announce a voluntary five year process to transition away from lead ammunition - a disastrous policy.
By proposing a voluntary transition and self-regulation, we have bought the shooting sector time to get ready. We are now better prepared as a sector for change. It gave us time to inform the shooting community of the changes coming and provide educational sustainable ammunition shooting days to introduce those who shoot to lead-free shotgun cartridges. It gave the ammunition manufacturers time to make significant progress and deliver a range of viable alternatives to lead. Many shoots are now lead-free, and their game is being sold in supermarkets across the UK. The transition period has enabled the shooting community to innovate and adapt.
That is not logical. The HSE review in GB mirrors the ECHA review in the EU (and NI). We await Defra's response to the Dec 2024 HSE recommendations. ECHA recommendations were made some 2 years ago and the resulting draft EC regulations have recently been published (and they will be challenged)It's somewhat tendentious that you're now pretending that a government ban following immediately on the heels of this failure of policy is actually just the HSE acting independently.
Feel free to take all that up with CA, CPSA and NGO.We all know that lead exposure is harmful - especially to children. Yet the proposals don't address lead as a toxin, they address ammunition only. I'm in the middle of a planning process where government actually requires the use of lead over alternatives in areas where children, birds and domestic animals will certainly be exposed. It's not about lead.
How do you know it supports conservation? The GWCT said there was a lack of evidence of this. It might do, or it might have no conservation benefit at all. What are the "existing efforts across Europe"? Yes, the efforts of anti-shooting activists. At last, you're coming clean about this.
A PR posture, in effect. Since lead ammunition has been bumped to the top of the list ahead of far more serious issues, one might rightly be sceptical as to the credibility of shooting orgs' PR claims relating to this.
They have to, don't they? They've been shafted.