Lead ammunition restrictions - government announcement

New Avon Arms
Status
Not open for further replies.
Sinistral said:
All of this is in the DEFRA statement.
59. Individuals with collections of lead ammunition that is not for firing – providing they hold the relevant condition on their firearm or shot gun license - are exempted from the restriction. These collections do not result in lead entering the environment and so I consider that it is proportionate to allow this.

Exemptions to these bans

The Restriction shall not apply to projectiles intended for use or used by, or placed on the market for use by, persons whose certificate conditions specify that the projectiles are not to be fired.
Click to expand...

However you do not need to has a SGC to be in possession of S2 cartridges, only to purchase them.
So how will that work.
 
enfieldspares said:
Yes. To which the reply I received from Conor O'Gorman


That rat you shot with lead shot came at the expense of how many birds that subsequently ate the lead shot you fired in your garden? Maybe none, maybe some. That is perhaps the bigger picture to bear in mind as regards live quarry shooting where the risks of lead shot dissemination cannot be contained - the approach of HSE has been zero risk in this respect - so if there are to be exemptions, what should be the cut off point be as regards the continuation of lead shot for live quarry shooting - and is it politically tenable to argue to continue to poison birds using some types of cartridges 'just because'?
Click to expand...
Wow. That is an incredibly stupid, ill-informed, unscientific and incoherent line of argument. What an embarrassment!
 
Conor O'Gorman said:
BASC has been opposed to further restrictions throughout the HSE review and various exemptions for rifle ammunition have been successfully argued for, also total exemption for airgun pellets, as detailed in previous threads. Arguments for exemptions for the continued use of lead shot on shooting ranges were not successful. As per the BASC response published today in relation to the government's announcement, there are two things we have stated we will continue to argue for - a 5 year transition period rather than 3 year transition period for the various restriction proposals for lead shot and lead bullets - and reclassification of larger rifle ammunition calibres to include .243.
Click to expand...
What a crock of sh1t. I regret that there's really no other description for this disgraceful catalogue of idiotic and mendacious behaviour.
 
Apthorpe said:
I’m a little confused. In this announcement, BASC is reported to be supportive of banning lead ammunition and aware of an impending lead ban for years, but has been repeatedly assuring its members that it was opposed to such a ban and was committed to opposing any further restrictions. How does BASC account for giving mutually incompatible messages to different audiences - effectively assuring members it was representing their interests while working with regulators to oppose shooters’ interests?
Click to expand...
Voice of shooting or voice of the antis? The presence of John Swift should be a warning to everyone with his track record variously supporting the 2004 Hunting Act, support for the lead ban on the LAG where he was allegedly representing our interests and to cap it all chumming up with Mark Avery of Wild Justice and apparently attacking shooting interests on Avery's blog
 
timbrayford said:
Voice of shooting or voice of the antis? The presence of John Swift should be a warning to everyone with his track record variously supporting the 2004 Hunting Act, support for the lead ban on the LAG where he was allegedly representing our interests and to cap it all chumming up with Mark Avery of Wild Justice and apparently attacking shooting interests on Avery's blog
Click to expand...
I'd assumed Swuft was a lone bad apple. Evidently there are still some rotten eggs in the basket. Shameful enough without the flagrant duplicity and dishonesty.
 
Heym SR20 said:
In a parallel universe called the real world there is plenty of evidence that lead in any for is harmful to living organisms. This is very well understood by the scientific and medical communities with plenty of supporting evidence. For years dangers of lead have been well understood by military and range operators - especially in indoor ranges. Indeed any packet of ammunition will contain warnings about the dangers of lead.

There has also been plenty of evidence put forward that demonstrates that lead is harmful to wild life, whether this ingested pellets picked up as grit or if eaten as lead fragments eaten as part remains or deer or birds that have been shot.

Indeed the shooting community, through the likes of GWCT, BASC have supported these real world findings.

What the pro lead groups have not done is produce the empirical scientific evidence to support that lead is NOT harmful to living organisms, that ingested lead is NOT absorbed into the blood and deposited into bones etc. They have plenty of time to produce such evidence but so far have not been able to do so. Or if they have submitted to the powers that be, it has been disregarded.

Below is the GWCT advisory note on lead that has been their position for a number of years.

Lead Ammunition - Game and Wildlife Conservation Trust

www.gwct.org.uk www.gwct.org.uk

However within the likes of the SD community there is a belief that lead is perfectly fine to use. You need to produce the evidence that lead is not harmful to man, bird, beast or plant and you need to produce it in a manner which we will be understood by the Scientific and medical communities and will overturn their widely held opinion, so we can all go back to use lead piping, lead based solders, lead paints and putties, lead in petrol, and lead in cosmetics and on whigs.
Click to expand...
The fact that many of the shooting community have consumed lead shot game without developing any clinical symptoms as a consequence is evidence that it isn't harmful and exposes significant failings of medical science to explain this
 
The mijistwr responsibke for this deciaion was quotwd as claiming that the ban on lead ammunition would somehow alleviate the pollution of ohr rivers by sewage and slurry. Absolutely mental.
 
dunwater said:
There was a case of salmonella traced back to a pheasant. The pheasant had been shot with lead shot.
There was also a case in Scotland where a deer carcass was found to have been contaminated with salmonella and it caused several people to become ill. The deer was also killed by a lead bullet.
If you want more, there are literally hundreds of studies demonstrating that lead consumption causes illness and death in wildlife.
It’s not just about humans…
Click to expand...
Salmonella is a bacteria, nothing whatsoever to do with lead projectiles
 
bowji john said:
As was lead piping to beer taps

A famous case of lead poisoning was related to a chap that had no association with occupational exposure to lead

It was found that he was a pub regular- usually the first in

His was the first pint pulled from beer left overnight in lead pipes

That was taught years ago on occy heath courses

My recollection is vague - but you get the idea
Click to expand...
Oh yes weak acids will combine with lead to form a weakly toxic liquid but what has that got to do with solid projectiles?
 
Sinistral said:
I can't read your attachment, but understand your point. :rolleyes:
We're quoting separate parts of a ministerial statement which needs to be read as a whole, e.g. Section 30 defines .22rf (but not .22CF) as 'small calibre'.
The problem is that excluding .22 Centrefires goes against the spirit of the legislation, which is all 'lead shot and lead bullets' in Section 45.
Until the draft amendment is laid no-one knows exactly what's planned. Let's leave it until then, as I'm not interested in who's right or wrong . . just the facts. :confused:

29. The most effective risk management option is a prohibition on the placing on the market and use of lead bullets for live quarry shooting.

30. Bullets are generally either centrefire or rimfire. Rimfire are used at the smaller calibres.

********************************************************************************************************

45. Taking into account the Restriction Dossier, the Final Opinion, the socio-economic impact and the availability of alternatives to lead ammunition, I consider that there is an unacceptable risk to the environment and human health resulting from the use of lead shot and lead bullets, and that the risk needs to be addressed by a restriction. It is therefore appropriate to introduce a restriction on lead shot and bullets and, as a result, I am proposing a draft amendment to Annex 17.
Click to expand...
If its an unacceptable risk why the exemptions for the police and military?
 
On the up side …… deer tracking dogs prices are going to be off the scale. I see a good businesses opportunity.
Copper is good for boiling vessels and conducting electricity…… ammunition….. pffft .. the emperor’s new clothes.
 
hendrix's rifle said:
So now ive got the opportunity to reply properly - the current load im using across the 243 and prc is the sierra tgk which suits me out to 500+ yards and work a treat. The lead free that matches the performance of that bullet is the yew tree TLR. The sierra is around 38-40p a bullet. The yew tree around £1.20-£1.25 a bullet (before post, I can pick up sierra locally but not yew tree). Thats 3 sierra bullets for 1 yew tree. Now take in to consideration i can fire off 50-60 rounds during a range session/plinking session ringing gongs. There in lies the problem. Its automatically three times more expensive. THREE TIMES MORE EEXPENSIVE. Powder and primers remain the same but that 50 rounds throughout a day in the hills would cost considerably less with lead.

You sit there single minded as usual and not thinking about all the other shooters that actually enjoy training and shooting their rifles. We don't just shoot one or two deer a month. I'm out foxing every week, rabbits and long range corvids likewise and then shooting anywhere between 30-50 deer a year depending on work constraints and deer activity. Yes, that expense of three times the price adds up bloody quick.

As for your comment on mimicking hunting bullets, don't talk such bo11ocks. They're usually half the BC of a decent lead bullet (shaped like a brick 9/10) and don't offer anyway near the same terminal performance as lead. Shoot a deer at 400 with both and I put good money on it the lead kills quicker. I know this because ive actually tried this (hence me knowing the closest thing is the yew tree TLR).

Simmer down for once and open your bloody eyes.
Click to expand...
So you will have a few choices then

1) Do your long range gong bashing on an approved range where lead bullets are captured and can be removed.

2) use a cheaper target version of a monolithic bullet to shoot your gongs on an unapproved range.

3) you can carry on shooting crows etc with a 22 centrefire rifle - these are not covered by the ban

4) you can improve your stalking skills and get a bit closer than 400 metres of a deer. Frankly any bullet at 400 metres has little energy. I haven’t tried shooting deer at 400m nor do I have any desire to try.

5) Your comments on BCs of Monolithics being half that of lead?

The 7mm 139gn GMX Mono - BC is 0.486.

Meanwhile their 7mm 139gn SST lead core and Interbond bullets are also 0.486.

Admittedly that is straight from their old load 9th edition manual so I expect developments in the last year or two must have hugely diverged things.

7) You choose to shoot how many rounds to shoot in a plinking session. 50 to 60 rounds of any centre fire is already costing you at least £50 to £60. Nobody is making you spend that money.

If costs go up, you can either spend more or shoot less. Again its your choice.

8) as for your 30 to 50 deer. You either have to buy no other household meat, or you sell them to a game dealer. Either way your bullet costs are offset by the value you gain. Monolithics cause less damage , which means better meat recovery.


8) or you can take up golf.
 
timbrayford said:
If its an unacceptable risk why the exemptions for the police and military?
Click to expand...

I suppose the argument is that the Police and Military don't generally shoot things that end up in the food chain...

It is all complete nonsense and I am quite disappointed in BASCs role in all of this. I don't think I will be renewing my membership when it comes due.
 
Heym SR20 said:
So you will have a few choices then

1) Do your long range gong bashing on an approved range where lead bullets are captured and can be removed.

2) use a cheaper target version of a monolithic bullet to shoot your gongs on an unapproved range.

3) you can carry on shooting crows etc with a 22 centrefire rifle - these are not covered by the ban

4) you can improve your stalking skills and get a bit closer than 400 metres of a deer. Frankly any bullet at 400 metres has little energy. I haven’t tried shooting deer at 400m nor do I have any desire to try.

5) Your comments on BCs of Monolithics being half that of lead?

The 7mm 139gn GMX Mono - BC is 0.486.

Meanwhile their 7mm 139gn SST lead core and Interbond bullets are also 0.486.

Admittedly that is straight from their old load 9th edition manual so I expect developments in the last year or two must have hugely diverged things.

7) You choose to shoot how many rounds to shoot in a plinking session. 50 to 60 rounds of any centre fire is already costing you at least £50 to £60. Nobody is making you spend that money.

If costs go up, you can either spend more or shoot less. Again its your choice.

8) as for your 30 to 50 deer. You either have to buy no other household meat, or you sell them to a game dealer. Either way your bullet costs are offset by the value you gain. Monolithics cause less damage , which means better meat recovery.


8) or you can take up golf.
Click to expand...
A typical response from a clueless amateur.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

BASC FAQs on lead ammunition restrictions
Replies
0
Views
278
Conor O'Gorman
C
  • Locked
GWCT lead ban : One for the BASC bashers
11 12 13
Replies
241
Views
12K
RF76
RF76
Use of shotguns on deer under Deer Act 1991 in England and Wales to become de facto illegal under lead shot ban.
2 3 4
Replies
60
Views
3K
20-250
2
Use of shotguns on deer under Deer (Scotland) Order 1985 to become de facto illegal with lead shot ban.
Replies
6
Views
608
BigT
BigT
Lead Ban
2
Replies
21
Views
2K
enfieldspares
enfieldspares
1967spud Reloading Supplies Ltd - UK Suppliers for Reloading Equipment supplies, We also stock Bullet Heads and Bullet Cases Guns Cabinets, Night vision and much much more...
Back
Top