An huge own goal by the Shooting Organizations - the lead farce

[Conor O'Gorman]

Perhaps rather than deflecting and choosing to cast aspersions on those who disagree with you ,who incidentally appear to be in the majority, now would be opportune to drop the baseless accusations and simply reply in your own words to points raised and questions asked. Should you be keen to discuss guns perhaps start another thread but for now a straightforward personal response that confronts the GWCT statements I have quoted would bring clarity as up to this point you have relied on excessive copy and pasting to deflect from your reluctance or inability to justify honestly your desire to see lead shot restrictions embraced.

You are not disagreeing with anyone and are now bizarrely starting to comment on your own posts further muddying the waters. It is your choice to believe what you believe based on the same scientific literature available to us all, and which continues to grow. Perhaps now would be opportune to contact the GWCT directly and let us know how you get on.

 

[Conor O'Gorman]

Or why in New Zealand lead shot is still very much allowed and permitted for shooting with some defined exceptions?

There are many shoots in the UK who would be lawful of the New Zealand model for lead and non-lead shot were the answer here as they would be more than two hundred metres away from water which...in their rules is which is "taken as any stream, river, lake or tidal area, "more than 3m wide".

I have consistently asked why BASC rejects the New Zealand model as a solution, so I'll ask again...why? I hope that a public answer on this thread can than be made.

For is not the reality the need to sustain big bag commercial shooting and its fiction of it being harvesting game meat for the food chain? So all about not welfare of birds ingesting lead but about lead shot game being unsaleable to the major supermarkets. And so the harvesting game argument failing.

Non-toxic shot regulations

Hunters are required to use non-toxic shot when hunting waterfowl within 200 metres of water. 2021 saw a complete ban on the use of lead shot for all but 410 gauge, and that exemption ended at the end of the 2023 game bird hunting season. This ban will be strictly enforced on public, private...

www.fishandgame.org.nz

New Zealand has made its own decisions for its situation. In the UK we have wetlands restrictions and species restrictions that differ between E/W/S/NI. The basis for those restrictions was the AEWA treaty. In the EU new wetland restrictions were implemented in 2023 going much wider than the current restrictions in UK.

As for NZ there has been recently published research on lead ammunition ingestion by endangered keas and recommendations to eliminate lead-based ammunition in kea habitats.

https://conbio.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/conl.13059

As a CPSA member, you continue to focus on BASC. Why do we not hear from you on CPSA matters? We are waiting since December 2024 to hear from you on the CPSA update on the HSE recommendations.

 

[Ruger#1]

You are not disagreeing with anyone and are now bizarrely starting to comment on your own posts further muddying the waters. It is your choice to believe what you believe based on the same scientific literature available to us all, and which continues to grow.

Well I know I’ve successfully made my point when rather than counter the points made you choose to fill your reply post with irrelevance.
That you are unable to give a robust defence of your support for lead shot restrictions by stating in your own words the evidence that convinces you of the justification of lead shot restrictions inland is telling.
Perhaps as others have stated the reasons for your support of lead shot restrictions lie outwith any genuine concern for wild game numbers and are more closely linked to protecting the commercial game shooting market along with possibly other more political motives in the best interests of BASC and its employees.
Simply put as BASC is in business to protect the interests of shooters why instead is it choosing to support the aims of our opponents using such a fragile case supported by modelling rather than a robust evidenced based case that provides a solution that decreases the risks where appropriate on commercial shoots leaving those truly sustainable areas of shooting where lead shot use is minimal to choose whether to follow the path of voluntary lead shot restriction.
Perhaps you would care to comment ,addressing the issue rather than your almost obligatory copy and paste or derogatory personal comments or “ Play the ball not the man” as previously mentioned in your own defence.

 

[Whitefront]

Conor, you have the patience of a saint, but I am not sure why you still bother responding to the little handful of bashers who infest this site. There are a tiny number of them and they simply take turns saying the same thing, in a slightly different manner, over and over again. They are utterly impervious to science, even when it is proffered under the aegis of the GCWT. They don't like links to independent sources or scientific references; instead, they seem to delight in wasting BASC member-funded time.

I don't like to be unkind, but I suspect most of the bashers are elderly and in the latter stage of their shooting careers. They have had their fun and find it hard to imagine shooting without lead. This is despite that fact that some of us haven't found it necessary to use the horrible stuff for years and the majority of deer stalkers no longer use it. The bashers don't seem to really care about the environment, or even about avoidable risks to human health. Some of the bashers have boasted about getting rid of lead-contaminated meat to their "friends and families." Ugh. I can only hope the victims of this dumping don't include children or pregnant women - even the SGA draws the line at feeding those groups with lead-laced game.

As I have pointed out before, the SGA, which has adopted a general position on lead of the type apparently favoured by most of the bashers, has only a tiny fraction of the members that BASC has - let alone that of all the nine organisations. One might argue that, whatever its quibbles, the shooting community has consistently voted with its wallet. So, why keep feeding the trolls?

 

[Ruger#1]

Conor, you have the patience of a saint, but I am not sure why you still bother responding to the little handful of bashers who infest this site. There are a tiny number of them and they simply take turns in saying the same thing, in a slightly different manner, over and over again. They are utterly impervious to science, even when it is proffered under the aegis of the GCWT. They don't like links to independent sources or scientific references; instead, they seem delight in wasting BASC member-funded time.

I don't like to be unkind, but I suspect most of the bashers are elderly and in the latter stage of their shooting careers. They have had their fun and find it hard to imagine shooting without lead. This is despite that fact that some of us haven't found it necessary to use the horrible stuff for years and the majority of deer stalkers no longer use it. The bashers don't seem to really care about the environment, or even about avoidable risks to human health. Some of the bashers have boasted about getting rid of lead-contaminated meat to their "friends and families." Ugh. I can only hope the victims of this dumping don't include children or pregnant women - even the SGA draws the line at feeding those groups with lead-laced game.

As I have pointed out before, the SGA, which has adopted a general position on lead of the type apparently favoured by most of the bashers, has only a tiny fraction of the members that BASC has - let alone that of all the nine organisations. One might argue that, whatever it quibbles, the shooting community has consistently voted with its wallet. So, why keep feeding the trolls?

Perhaps if the issues raised were not ignored there would be no need for repitition.
You make a few disparaging assumptions in your post and sweeping generalisation to make a case for your opinions.
If BASC had taken a poll of its members to ascertain support for its lead shot restrictions stance we would be aware of the level of support within its membership. Should BASC poll its membership now the level of support would be clear. After all BASC is its membership and without support for its lead shot policy those disagreeing with its policy may in fact be true BASC supporters ie supporting the views of BASC members rather than BASC bashers. I’m sure in the interests of clarification there should be no opposition to a poll unless of course the results may prove embarrassing for the very small handful of vocal BASC employees who are using the forum to influence opinion.

 

[Crunchy Peanut Butter]

I would like all game shooting, wildfowling and deer stalking to still be a viable pursuit for my grandchildren (I am below 40 now). Unfortunately I do not have time to campaign and engage myself so each year I pay a small amount to BASC so they can pursue these aims on my behalf, how they get to this end state I am less worried. What is abundantly clear is that compromise has to be made, arguing to maintain a toxic material with a path into the human food chain doesn't even register as sensible proposition.

 

[Tim.243]

Conor, you have the patience of a saint, but I am not sure why you still bother responding to the little handful of bashers who infest this site. There are a tiny number of them and they simply take turns saying the same thing, in a slightly different manner, over and over again. They are utterly impervious to science, even when it is proffered under the aegis of the GCWT. They don't like links to independent sources or scientific references; instead, they seem to delight in wasting BASC member-funded time.

I don't like to be unkind, but I suspect most of the bashers are elderly and in the latter stage of their shooting careers. They have had their fun and find it hard to imagine shooting without lead. This is despite that fact that some of us haven't found it necessary to use the horrible stuff for years and the majority of deer stalkers no longer use it. The bashers don't seem to really care about the environment, or even about avoidable risks to human health. Some of the bashers have boasted about getting rid of lead-contaminated meat to their "friends and families." Ugh. I can only hope the victims of this dumping don't include children or pregnant women - even the SGA draws the line at feeding those groups with lead-laced game.

As I have pointed out before, the SGA, which has adopted a general position on lead of the type apparently favoured by most of the bashers, has only a tiny fraction of the members that BASC has - let alone that of all the nine organisations. One might argue that, whatever its quibbles, the shooting community has consistently voted with its wallet. So, why keep feeding the trolls?

Hang on, science gets it very very wrong some times with people still living with the affects of this so please tell me the science was correct?
No it was not.
You are 65 and me 64 so could have easily been ones affected had my Mother taken it and she spoke to me about in in later life but carried on and got past the morning sickness.
Also the people affected with the infected blood the science was wrong also.



In the late 1950s and early 1960s, the use of thalidomide in 46 countries was prescribed to women who were pregnant or who subsequently became pregnant, and consequently resulted in the "biggest anthropogenic medical disaster ever," with more than 10,000 children born with a range of severe deformities, such as phocomelia, as well as thousands of miscarriages.

Then the infected blood scandal
The UK Infected Blood Scandal refers to the tragic event where thousands of patients were infected with HIV, hepatitis C, and other blood-borne illnesses after receiving contaminated blood transfusions and blood products between the 1970s and early 1990s. This resulted in over 3,000 deaths and thousands more living with long-term health complications. The scandal led to an independent inquiry, the Infected Blood Inquiry, which recommended compensation and other measures. The government has since announced a compensation scheme and made interim payments to those affected.

 

[Tim.243]

I would like all game shooting, wildfowling and deer stalking to still be a viable pursuit for my grandchildren (I am below 40 now). Unfortunately I do not have time to campaign and engage myself so each year I pay a small amount to BASC so they can pursue these aims on my behalf, how they get to this end state I am less worried. What is abundantly clear is that compromise has to be made, arguing to maintain a toxic material with a path into the human food chain doesn't even register as sensible proposition.

Neither does smoking or drinking and the amount of households who smoke drink feed their kids crap food little exercise sweets crisps vapes
Worry about the large % of bad intake each and every day let alone the game food most family's would never dream of eating as they eat cheap crap food

 

[Crunchy Peanut Butter]

Neither does smoking or drinking and the amount of households who smoke drink feed their kids crap food little exercise sweets crisps vapes
Worry about the large % of bad intake each and every day let alone the game food most family's would never dream of eating as they eat cheap crap food

Can we not just worry about all of it instead?

 

[Tim.243]

Can we not just worry about all of it instead?

Poor reply, how many lead free game food meals are served in your local school compared to the others in my short list?

 

[Crunchy Peanut Butter]

Poor reply, how many lead free game food meals are served in your local school compared to the others in my short list?

I think there is space to worry about unhealthy diets and the presence of toxic materials in food. I am a parent and worry about both. I also worry about many other things and take steps to prevent them.

I would suggest your initial suggestion that the issue of unhealthy eating in the UK overwhelms us as our society and government lacks the capacity to look at both issues was poor.

 

[Rewulf]

They are utterly impervious to science, even when it is proffered under the aegis of the GCWT. They don't like links to independent sources or scientific references;

The 'science' is based on supposition, models, and estimates based on small samples, it also appears to be oriented toward a particular result, which is hardly surprising when you look at the supplied references, lets just say the names Green, and Pain pop up regularly, and these among others, are hardly 'independent'

they seem to delight in wasting BASC member-funded time.

Conor seems to delight in sparring with us though doesnt he ?

 

[Tim.243]

I think there is space to worry about unhealthy diets and the presence of toxic materials in food. I am a parent and worry about both. I also worry about many other things and take steps to prevent them.

I would suggest your initial suggestion that the issue of unhealthy eating in the UK overwhelms us as our society and government lacks the capacity to look at both issues was poor.

The government is not to blame for people putting crap food on the table, you never answered my lead free game food question which is a typical swerve.
If you want to see unhealthy eating take a walk down the waddling high street.
All my family ate lead shot game rabbits pheasants red legs ducks before the steel shot (yes I use it on the marsh)
Dad went at 91 G dad 90 Nan 91 Mum 89.

 

[Crunchy Peanut Butter]

The government is not to blame for people putting crap food on the table, you never answered my lead free game food question which is a typical swerve.
If you want to see unhealthy eating take a walk down the waddling high street.
All my family ate lead shot game rabbits pheasants red legs ducks before the steel shot (yes I use it on the marsh)
Dad went at 91 G dad 90 Nan 91 Mum 89.

Sorry, I assumed it was a rhetorical question, I have absolutely no idea what is on the menu of my local school. Does that somehow undermine what I have said?

 

[Tim.243]

Sorry, I assumed it was a rhetorical question, I have absolutely no idea what is on the menu of my local school. Does that somehow undermine what I have said?

As you wrote
Can we not just worry about all of it instead?
I had no need to ask you a rhetorical question as you answered it.

Facts are science does get it wrong from time to time with dreadful results, most of the time the results are fantastic but some are not and when that happens there are life long lasting affects.

But people will wriggle and wring their hands backing the science on the lead shot just like the Blood scandals!

 

[Crunchy Peanut Butter]

s

As you wrote
Can we not just worry about all of it instead?
I had no need to ask you a rhetorical question as you answered it.

Facts are science does get it wrong from time to time with dreadful results, most of the time the results are fantastic but some are not and when that happens there are life long lasting affects.

But people will wriggle and wring their hands backing the science on the lead shot just like the Blood scandals!

Sorry, I am a little lost with the point on school meals and the comparisons you are making with lead shot and a blood scandal? Clearly far too profound for me

 

[Conor O'Gorman]

Conor, you have the patience of a saint, but I am not sure why you still bother responding to the little handful of bashers who infest this site. There are a tiny number of them and they simply take turns saying the same thing, in a slightly different manner, over and over again. They are utterly impervious to science, even when it is proffered under the aegis of the GCWT. They don't like links to independent sources or scientific references; instead, they seem to delight in wasting BASC member-funded time.

I don't like to be unkind, but I suspect most of the bashers are elderly and in the latter stage of their shooting careers. They have had their fun and find it hard to imagine shooting without lead. This is despite that fact that some of us haven't found it necessary to use the horrible stuff for years and the majority of deer stalkers no longer use it. The bashers don't seem to really care about the environment, or even about avoidable risks to human health. Some of the bashers have boasted about getting rid of lead-contaminated meat to their "friends and families." Ugh. I can only hope the victims of this dumping don't include children or pregnant women - even the SGA draws the line at feeding those groups with lead-laced game.

As I have pointed out before, the SGA, which has adopted a general position on lead of the type apparently favoured by most of the bashers, has only a tiny fraction of the members that BASC has - let alone that of all the nine organisations. One might argue that, whatever its quibbles, the shooting community has consistently voted with its wallet. So, why keep feeding the trolls?

It is tedious at times but each thread has positives both online and offline. There are a few already on or close to the no reply zone.

 

[Tim.243]

s

Sorry, I am a little lost with the point on school meals and the comparisons you are making with lead shot and a blood scandal? Clearly far too profound for me

The lead shot ban is based on science and studies also we don't know if that will be correct until many years have passed.
The infected blood scandals were based on science just like Thalidomide so there are mistakes in science but it takes a long time for the results to be proven.

Fix the potholes first then ban the lead lol

​

 

[Ruger#1]

There are a few already on or close to the no reply zone.

Running away from responding to pertinent points and questions is your forte and casts significant doubt over your ability to defend your opinions. While I acknowledge the difficulty in dealing with numerous detractors ,with little support from the minority in agreement with you , avoiding replying directly to concerns regarding what is in reality the politics of the lead shot issue (as the science is demonstrably inconclusive ) can only feed suspicions that all is not as clear cut as you would have us believe regarding the move to restrictions on lead shot. It is certainly not because any supporting scientific data dictates that the risk of retaining lead shot is so significant that anything other than a complete ban ,that includes clay pigeon shooting ,is untenable.
A vote by BASC members to ascertain if the majority support a lead shot ban and also whether BASC has represented their views on this issue would determine to what extent BASC management is the voice of their members followed by a poll of the shooting community to ascertain to what extent BASC management has accurately represented the voice of shooting would bring much needed perspective to the issue.

 

[Rewulf]

It is certainly not because any supporting scientific data dictates that the risk of retaining lead shot is so significant that anything other than a complete ban ,that includes clay pigeon shooting ,is untenable.

This. Is the crux of the matter.

It is tedious at times but each thread has positives both online and offline. There are a few already on or close to the no reply zone.

Its that tedious youve been doing it for nearly 5 years

And as far as not replying, it doesnt matter, you never give straight answers anyway !