I quoted my previous post to put in context the two quotes I later highlighted. Sorry if this confused you I expected that the possessor of a doctorate would have easily followed my train of thought. In honesty I’m surprised you read my posts as you consistently fail to address the points raised.
An huge own goal by the Shooting Organizations - the lead farce
- Thread starter cjm1066
- Start date
- Status
Smellydog
Well-Known Member
Is there facts and figures on the statement above!
jimmer.13
Well-Known Member
You base this statement upon what evidence?
Are you an RFD selling vast amounts of copper ammunition over lead?
Do you work in the stalking industry?
Genuine questions not being facetious.
Conor O'Gorman
Well-Known Member
And yet again the personal comments continue. I think a wee 'sit rep' is timely.
Your gaslighting is ineffective, you hide behind your keyboard, refusing phone calls with myself or Terry at BASC to address your concerns. You won't run for Council, you won't engage in AGMs, you won't visit BASC stands at myriad events across the county to talk to staff or Council members.
It seems you have no actual bottle to challenge BASC or GWCT directly as an alleged member of these orgs nor conviction in your beliefs and you don't really want to make a difference, rather seem to prefer presenting problems and spreading misinformation and rallying fellow 'trolls' to your cause from the comfort of your armchair or whatever other structure you reside upon during your toxic tirades.
You started this crusade on PigeonWatch last year, fixating on me/BASC, had your chain yanked by moderators as a result, and now you wish to continue that on here. On PigeonWatch here is a sample of comments you have made about me, still available online and attributable to you:
- Is there any chance that you may have been diagnosed with being on some sort of behavioural spectrum that might explain your lack of social awareness. It might be something you wish to explore as perhaps mild autism may be the root of your ,at times, unusual if not bizarre interactions on the forum.
- Clocking off now ? that’s a fair bit of overtime put in ,before retirement I used to put in a days work before clocking off.
- instead of spending hours in defence of your ego do you not think your time at work would be better spent actually doing what you are paid to do
- Clocking on for another hard days work at the office Conor ?
- The disproportionate amount of time you spend peddling information that contributes absolutely nothing to the BASC position of opposing any further lead shot restrictions seems to be an abuse of members subscriptions that pay your wages.
- Classic Conor ,completely ignoring the main points made and launching into an irrelevant monologue.
- It seems that you are preoccupying yourself playing ,while working from home no doubt, with figures when there’s real work to be done on our behalf.
- I’m actually laughing at the apparent intensity of your posts
- Hang your head in shame Conor O’Gorman you’re a disappointment to those you claim to represent.
- Your blinkered opinions have no place on the forum and until you choose to put them in context by critical analysis they are just propaganda to support an unjustified goal.
- cease using the forum for spreading your unsubstantiated claims on what is a shooting forum not the LACS,WWT or Raptor Persecution web sites.
- I suggest you read back slowly ,yet again , to remember what you posted earlier.
- Did you have difficulty in understanding my last post,the one you quoted.
- Wasting time questioning is a typical political trick to avoid answering usually used by incompetent politicians who either have no answers ,find the answers uncomfortable or wish to draw attention away from points made.
- I am amazed that in light of this that you are still employed by BASC now , in my mind at least ,a doubtful voice of shooting due to your ill thought through postings .
- It seems that you spend all day on social media , would it be too much to expect that you engaged in a more profitable use of your time by working on behalf of shooting rather than against it. Need I remind you that your job is to represent shooters not create personal agendas and use your allocated work time to promote them.
- Perhaps comparable to the folk tale An Emperor’s New Clothes where instead of two con men and a magical fabric that could be spun into the finest suit we have Conor and his catalogue of inconclusive science riding on a woke agenda of virtue signalling.
- With employees like CO I’d be equally worried about their present. He almost bears comparison to Chris Packham in many respects.
Enough is enough. There are some on here making it very personal,this is a forum not basc, if you want to change their policy go and get yourself elected onto their board. Basc,post on here to keep people informed,and while we and they no doubt welcome debate this simply isn't, this is bordering on obsession by some.
Conor O'Gorman
Well-Known Member
Thank you @Whitefront and @Crunchy Peanut Butter for your logical and rational comments on this topic.
The science speaks for itself and the worrying thing is we barely understand how far it goes and that's just birds let alone human health. Research has already shown that lead from lead shot is being assimilated by earthworms and then woodcock are suffering heightened lead levels from eating the earthworms. There is even research that suggests that woodpeckers are ingesting lead shot when foraging in trees for grubs by inserting their bills into holes in bark caused by lead shot and taking in that embedded lead shot inside those bore holes mistaking it for grubs.
Here is a table covering a range of non-wildfowl species from Proceedings – The Oxford Lead Symposium
The science speaks for itself and the worrying thing is we barely understand how far it goes and that's just birds let alone human health. Research has already shown that lead from lead shot is being assimilated by earthworms and then woodcock are suffering heightened lead levels from eating the earthworms. There is even research that suggests that woodpeckers are ingesting lead shot when foraging in trees for grubs by inserting their bills into holes in bark caused by lead shot and taking in that embedded lead shot inside those bore holes mistaking it for grubs.
Here is a table covering a range of non-wildfowl species from Proceedings – The Oxford Lead Symposium
Last edited:
Conor O'Gorman
Well-Known Member
The USA is way ahead of us on this with studies on the impact of lead shot bans on waterfowl populations and other aspects. For example, here is a recent study just from Illinois on crippling rates:
The effect of a ban on the use of lead ammunition for waterfowl hunting on duck and goose crippling rates in Illinois (2022)
Globally, there is increasing effort to transition away from the use of lead ammunition to mitigate its known risks to wildlife and human health. Whenever this transition is stated hunters frequently cite concerns about the effectiveness of non-lead ammunition, how it will result in greater crippling rates, and associated animal welfare costs. This area has been little studied, but recent studies have found no differences in crippling rates using lead and steel ammunition. Using segmented linear regression we evaluated 37 years of waterfowl harvest data in Illinois, United States, overlapping the transition to non-lead shot for waterfowl hunting in order to assess how crippling rates changed following the ban. The average crippling rate prior to the lead shot ban was 23% for both ducks and geese and reduced to an average of 15% and 11% for ducks and geese (respectively) following the ban. In addition, the annual trend in the proportion of ducks and geese crippled reversed following the ban, from a significant annually increasing to a significant annually decreasing trend. We offer hypotheses on behavioural and technological changes which may explain these changes and predict that crippling losses will not increase in Europe following a ban on the use of lead ammunition over wetlands in 2023.
Had your selective quoting also included all your own posts and the total content from which they were taken it would put the above comments in a proper context, nevertheless many of them are an accurate assessment of my opinion some in response to equally personal remarks and illustrate the frustration experienced when a supposed defender of shooters best interests chooses to create a purely emotional defence of the imposition of lead shot restrictions. Hence your posts describing “the minefields of lead for the poor wee partridges “ the nonsense tales of “a pair of prized pintails both killed by lead poisoning due to one shot taken at a corvid over wetland “ and numerous similar tall tales which Chris Packham would be proud to claim ownership of all in a desperate attempt to influence opinion to accept lead shot restrictions,
You have continually and consistently misrepresented shooters by following your own agenda to portray the use of lead shot in a poor light despite having absolutely no scientific data to support your opinions. I have previously labelled your efforts as a personal crusade and one which you are determined to continue despite the official BASC policy of opposing further leadvshot restrictions. Your own posts fail to substantiate their generalised claims and consistently ignore points made and questions asked. When you are questioned you invariably reply with irrelevant copy and paste data that you are aware fails to address any concerns.
In regard to the specific claims regarding my lack of ambition to become involved in BASC politics ,sorry I leave that to political people like yourself whose limited sense of responsibility towards shooters enables them to act in a way that I personally am not best suited to. Working on BASC Young shots days ,spending my time on wildfowling committees, organising clay shoots for newcomers and introducing many to fieldsports I’m comfortable with but the half truths and political shenanigans that you seem to be embroiled in are definitely not for me.
As regards character may I remind you of the personal message you initiated which after I responded you messaged “please stop messaging me “ on two occasions in order to have me suspended for seven days.
More seriously were the threatening personal messages you sent me and which after reading them my wife concluded that you were mentally unstable. All information I have kept to myself but in the interests of full disclosure I feel it only right that I contextualise your bitter quoted post. I am not one to run to moderators having the bottle to stand up for myself and on the one occasion when I have been taken to task thanks to the previously mentioned personal message farce I’m quite happy to accept it unlike yourself that when suspended on pigeonwatch chose to air your grievances on this forum misquoting the details to show yourself as the victim rather than the guilty party. Unsurprisingly.
When you feel under pressure when questioned you invariably resort to having a thread locked either by complaining or instigating a personal response. This is just the latest attempt in a catalogue of similar events. Perhaps in future consider responding to points raised on the forum rather than crying victim and engaging in personal character attacks that you have a history of falsely accusing others of.
All data which was available prior to 2016 when DEFRA declared there was insufficient evidence to justify further lead shot restrictions and which BASC itself decided that no evidence existed to merit acceptance of lead shot restrictions and declared No Science No Change to signal their reluctance to accept any change based on the evidence available at the time.It seems the only changes have been political despite assurances to the contrary. Perhaps there are studies carried out post 2016 concerning lead shot toxicity that make a strong case for further lead shot legislation if so they have still to be presented to support further legislation. Do such studies exist ? Apparently not.
Unfortunately having lived a long life and having seen the changes in gun laws and.predator protection over the years that is a dream. Think on my words in a few years time because it will not be a viable pursuit for your grandkids if they are to be born in the next ten years. By the time they reach the present.age to have a rifle or gun, shooting organisations will be defunct and only government employees will be shooting.
Don't believe it just look at hound hunting from the 50's until now and the 10/- gun licence that we all had then from the post office, and the state of the process now. Even an Fac was easy to get at that time.
Think on.
The demographics surrounding shotgun certificate possession where the vast majority of shooters are shown to be over the age of 50 (67% in England and Wales) indicates that in about a generation shooting sports as we know them now will probably cease to exist in their present form I see little sign of any significant increase in participation by the younger generations to replace the shooters destined to pass in the coming years and various pressures are combining to ensure a grim future for aspiring young fieldsportsmen and women.
Despite ample opportunity my own son has little inclination to replace me in the field and our different upbringings have ensured that his interests lie elsewhere. Greater opportunities dictate that shooting has insufficient attraction and he is preoccupied with cheaper and more sociable sports that exist and are more accessible in a suburban environment.
I find it bizarre that you interpret the challenging of information contained within your posts as gaslighting , are you aware of the meaning of the term and if so are you signalling that you are the victim of coercive behaviour designed to gain power and control over another and aimed at causing anxiety , depression and even PTSD as defined in a quick google search.
As explained earlier I have no interest in the political manoeuvring surrounding fieldsports so have no interest in running for council . I have no intention of incurring the costs required to attend the AGM with the small attendances it achieves as I see little value in doing so. I have visited BASC stands at Scone ,which I have attended every year since it started ,and Moy and found the staff manning the BASC stand invariably a caricature of the tweeded sportsman lost in conversation with their colleagues rather than attending to the few visitors attracted to the stand. In contrast the BDS site which is staffed by approachable open and friendly staff more able to connect with general enquiries is able to project fieldsports in a more positive light. I accept my posts are an inconvenience to you but are necessary in order to show that there is resistance to further lead shot restrictions that you are in effect being paid to actively promote despite there being a BASC policy of resisting further lead shot restrictions. You will notice that contrary to your depiction of an obsessive troll determined to gaslight and personally attack you I confine myself to challenging you on your posts regarding the lead shot issue. I do so because I feel that your opinions are ill founded and politically motivated and aim to restrict the use of lead shot in my Classic side by sides despite their use having no measurable impact on the environment. You would gain more respect if you had the bottle to confront the excesses of the commercial game shooting industry whose volume of lead shot dispersal has been responsible for the focus on lead shot impact outwith a wetland environment. That you fail to do so indicates your own lack of bottle. This post all typed out from the comfort of my armchair although I fail to see the significance of where I post from has any bearing on its validity.
Rewulf
Well-Known Member
Tells someone they are obsessive, delusional, and might have alzheimers, then complains (as usual) about being 'insulted' and 'it's getting personal '
Absolutely classic
Smellydog
Well-Known Member
A hint of narcissism maybe ....Tells someone they are obsessive, delusional, and might have alzheimers, then complains (as usual) about being 'insulted' and 'it's getting personal '
Absolutely classic
Am I understanding that correctly? in that you are trying to shut us up?
We await the governments response. The lead currently in the environment will be there for years and years, then the looming issue of plastic pollution as we see the end of fibre wads.
Last edited:
Crunchy Peanut Butter
Well-Known Member
I don't think you are questioning the toxic nature of lead but are questioning that it does harm. Speaking purely for myself, without conducting my own study or reviewing every study in existence, it stands to reason that consuming something that is toxic might be bad for you and if there are viable alternatives it is only logical to use them instead. Rather than seeing it as a threat to shooting I see it as a natural progression.
If I try and put myself in the shoes of someone who is neutral or anti shooting I think I would take a very similar view that spreading toxic material is probably not ideal.
If one of my neutral or anti mates asked my why do I think that so many shooters vehemently defend lead I would probably say that it comes down to two camps:
- Those who see any change to shooting as an attack on the sport and therefore they see the only defence to refuse to adapt or budge on any topic.
- Those who are both belligerent, stubborn and vocal.
Crunchy Peanut Butter
Well-Known Member
Not sure that I agree with you. I have no doubt that shooting will look very different but I disagree that it will no longer be a viable sport.
"shooting organisations will be defunct and only government employees will be shooting". I seriously doubt it will be Government Employees doing all the shooting. The Economy is on a trajectory that suggests increasing the number of crown servants or even contractors is unlikely. Yes, I expect it will become more legislated so if you have any sense set the conditions that you will be someone who is able to continue.
"Don't believe it just look at hound hunting from the 50's until now and the 10/- gun licence that we all had then from the post office, and the state of the process now. Even an Fac was easy to get at that time". As far as I can see, hunting with hounds has changed but clearly hasn't stopped. Not being able to buy a gun licence from a post office strikes me as a positive step forward and if I am honest, I have never found applying for an FAC anything other than straight forward.
So in summary, I have more optimism however our future relies on being proactive and staying ahead of threats as they emerge. If our collective end state is to maintain the sport as at 1994 then I think we are inevitably doomed to extinction.
Probably more than just two reasons.
3. Performance of non-toxic shot.
4. English tradition of keeping historical firearms viable.
5. End of small gauges
6. plastic pollution
7. end of subsonic cartridges
8. affordable alternatives.
Crunchy Peanut Butter
Well-Known Member
I don't mean to be patronising on this and I say it knowing I will get kick back but............... Shooting and cleanly killing a high goose is a challenge however a good steel cartridge (of which there are many factory loads) is more than capable of doing this. When I hear complaints from game shooters, vermin shooters and clay shooters I honestly cant see what their problem is. A pheasant, partridge, crow, clay are comparatively VERY easy to kill and quite frankly any competent shot should be able to do so with almost any brand of non toxic. For those who rejoice in poking at "Extreme" pheasants I would question the kill to cartridge ratio with lead anyway as nothing works on out of range birds.
3. Performance of non-toxic shot. - If you care about performance you should be shooting TSS anyway. Having done extensive testing and from experience I rate a good steel cartridge over lead in most applications.
4. English tradition of keeping historical firearms viable. - In 50 years time a browning cynergy will be a historic firearm. No one is making you get rid of it but if you genuinely care about performance I would expect you to be on a modern firearm. I bet you are not tipping up on your shoot with a historic blunderbuss rather a pretty modern gun that was made in the past 100 year.
5. End of small gauges I now do the vast majority of my wildfowling with a 410, this is on the foreshore at high geese. If you care about small gauges take the very small step to learn to home load.
6. plastic pollution - Fiber protective wads exist and are suitable for smaller steel. Demand will drive development. Aside from fibre alternatives there is the option to leave from where you are shooting with at least as many picked plastic wads as you fired. For clay shoots this is even easier. For game shooting fiber protective wads can be used as you are not shooting big shot sizes.
7. end of subsonic cartridges - If you care about performance you are unlikely to be using subsonics so I will loose little sleep on this point.
8. affordable alternatives. - Steel is cheaper than lead.
I just don't buy into these arguments at all.
Woodenbeam
Well-Known Member
My anti change rhetoric comes from the belief that it’s not ‘a natural progression’ but a misaligned strategy that backfired & inadvertently affected all aspects of shooting.
If it was a natural progression why are so few people using ‘viable alternatives’? Just look at the quantity of lead v not in your local shop.
What started as an idea to put big bag commercial shoots in a favourable light highlighted the fact lead is toxic - something that the anti’s immediately took hold of & have run with ever since at every opportunity. It may be toxic but applying some common sense puts it into perspective. Where’s all the lead poisoned stuff that should be littering the ground around me. Where have all these birds of prey come from when they’re eating all this poisonous toxic affected game/gallroch. Where are all the dead people who have died due to toxic meat?
If lead gets banned a proportion of shooters (old/new/prospective) will stop, excellent if you are anti shooting. It’ll then move onto something else to kick my enjoyable pastime further into touch.
If you wish to use lead free fine, I’ve not a problem with that, good on ya. I think with some types of shooting there is the potential to move forward in that direction. Provide a suitable round that does what it says on the tin at an affordable price & people will change - but it hasn’t happened yet (I’m thinking centre-fire)
If commercial game bird shoots are so interested in ‘lead free game’ why are they not leading the way by supplying cartridges on the day allowing a premium product to be then easily sold? Surely this would be a good demonstration of a sustainable way forward.
The trouble with Coner he’s paid to represent BASC, having any stance other than he does would be shooting himself in the foot. He keeps deflecting some of our questioning to other shooting organisations. Thing is BASC shouted this change from the rooftops, others just mistakenly went along with the flow. After all, who would dare question the fact that lead is toxic? You can’t because it is.
@Crunchy Peanut Butter What’s your .410 load?
- Status
Similar threads
