GWCT lead ban : One for the BASC bashers

[Norfolk Deer Search]

Mark Crudgington offered to 6 shooting related publications, an evidence based article repudiating claims that lead is harmful. It clearly showed that the evidence the shooting organisations was basing their sell-out upon, was cooked-up rubbish and in some cases lifted from RSPB sponsored studies with inconclusive results. Of the 6 only one, the Country Squire, took the letter.
The lady editor of the Field (that brave organ campaigning at every chance for country sports ) wrote back saying that she didn't think it was appropriate to "Challenge tge perceptions of her readership"
So even the shooting press were in on the sell-out.
Always thought the Field was a spank rag for monies twerps trying to work out what a pheasant looked like having received their first invitation to a corporate smash-up.

Like I’ve said before if everyone voted with their feet and left the shooting organisations it would financially cripple them!

That’s the only way to make them sit up and listen to what the shooting community actually wants.

Cut off the coin and watch them cough the stupidity will soon stop

 

[Ratel]

Yes but my dear friend, he has to sit on the fence! He is compromised and the big white elephant has to be covered up somehow....

Agreed, but we don't have flying elephumps round here white or otherwise. When will the so called conservationists on both side of the fence acknowledge the number of partridge and song birds that are being hammered to low numbers by Buźzards, Kites, and worst of all Sparrowhawks. When I first started on this estate it was nothing to see 30 yellowhammers along one hedge, now nothing. Skylarks have dwindled even though farming methods have remained the same. However I can ride round and see up to 16 kites, 6 or 7 buzzards and at least 4 Sparrowhawks. I'm lucky if I see half a dozen small birds. I forsee not too far away a time when no songbirds will sing on Spring mornings, thank the Lord I will not be around at that time.

 

[Spear Chucker]

I would have thought the next move from BASC et al, would be to challenge this proposed legislation in the courts???

I’m sure the membership would approve of their subscriptions being spent on such a worthy cause.
Hell I’d even consider re joining or definitely contribute to a go fund me page.
With such spurious and inconclusive so called scientific studies, a half decent barrister would have this nipped in a morning.
Plenty of legislation challenged and defeated in the courts recently.

I'd sign up again, not sure I'd be welcome after fairly determined opposition to the spin and fluff from BASC.

 

[Spear Chucker]

Like I’ve said before if everyone voted with their feet and left the shooting organisations it would financially cripple them!

That’s the only way to make them sit up and listen to what the shooting community actually wants.

Cut off the coin and watch them cough the stupidity will soon stop

I did jump. The trouble is that there a load of pigeon toed twits in membership that thought John Swift was doing a brilliant job. They are like sheep thanking the slaughterman.

 

[Conor O'Gorman]

As a zoological Conor you really should know that the greatest threat to Grey partridge certainly isn't lead shot. One can kill every ground based predator, never use lead shot, but the biggest threat and cause of dwindling numbers is airborne predation, which we can do sod all about. I was kèepering a partridge beat over 50 years ago, the threat was there then and it's twenty+ times as bad now on ground I look after. Lead shot deaths are very minimal.

Agreed, lead shot is not the biggest cause of mortality - it is 4-7% from UK and France data sets. The chick survival rate is critical to partridge population growth or decline. GWCT research in Britain has shown that the knife edge is circa 32% — above that the population increases, below that figure and the population decreases. So if lead shot ingestion is reducing the chick survival rate by even a few percent that is a significant controllable risk.

As regards lead shot, and sparrowhawks, here is what I replied to you when we last discussed this on the forum:

"Back in the 1960s when research started on the potential environmental impacts of the various 'wonder chemicals' there was sceptiscm and even anger at the idea - it was anti farming, it was communists and so on. Remember the book Silent Spring and the backlash against the author? The Game Conservancy for its part was looking at the impacts on grey partridge, that came in the 1970s I think. Now we take it as fact there is an impact on grey partridge chick survival rates from herbicides and insecticide use. All the research on nesting cover, stubbles, the innovations of beetle banks and so on, all thanks to Game Conservancy research and now embedded in agri-environmental schemes. Lots of things help and hinder grey partridge. Lead shot is on the hinder side and the GWCT has reviewed that evidence. I agree there are bigger impacts on grey partridge. But that's not to say lead shot should be ignored. Every wild bird counts.

As regards sparrowhawks, an intensive study of sparrowhawk and buzzard diet in the breeding season in England found the remains of a grey partridge only once in 73 prey items from five buzzard nests and 295 prey items from five sparrowhawk nests. GWCT did some research also and computer modelling of all data suggested that, at low densities, losses to raptors would result in a 39% reduction in average spring pair density over the long term. Because shooting losses occurred before the peak time for losses to raptors, the two causes of loss were largely additive. Shooting alone at 40% resulted in a 23% reduction over the long term in spring stocks, and shooting and raptors combined reduced spring stocks by 52%. Crucially, the impact of raptor predation was greatest at low partridge density; above approximately five pairs per 100 hectares the impact was much less."

I don't recall anyone on the forum questioning the sparrowhawk data and modelling work, but the partridge data and modelling on lead shot keeps being questioned. That's because we tend to accept without question the science that matches our world views. In other words if one believes that lead shot ingestion either does not happen for grey partridge adults/chicks or if it does, that it does not cause harm, then any research on this is likely to be dismissed for spurious reasons.

 

[Overlay]

Conor
I would check some your data
The one in particular “ members who haven’t rejoined” I think you’ll find a substantial drop in that section, I have had enough myself and there are in my tiny circle of shooting friends a great deal who them who feel the same, it’s a great shame it’s come to this

 

[Conor O'Gorman]

Conor
I would check some your data
The one in particular “ members who haven’t rejoined” I think you’ll find a substantial drop in that section, I have had enough myself and there are in my tiny circle of shooting friends a great deal who them who feel the same, it’s a great shame it’s come to this

If you have had enough please phone the membership team and tell them why - that way the reason (s) will be recorded.

 

[Conor O'Gorman]

I did jump. The trouble is that there a load of pigeon toed twits in membership that thought John Swift was doing a brilliant job. They are like sheep thanking the slaughterman.

John did do a brilliant job and was very well regarded in the UK and overseas and I am glad I had the opportunity to work with him over the years. Just because you think differently does not make it so.

 

[timbrayford]

If membership was based on their performance surrounding the lead ammunition issue ,membership wasn’t tied in to wildfowling club membership and shooters searched for liability insurance elsewhere the statements from BASC employees contrary to official BASC policy would see membership dwindle to double figures.
BASC have allowed themselves to be represented by an apologist for lead shot restrictions ,that they permit this to continue rather than question the logic of it raises uncomfortable questions and overshadows the good work they do on the shooting communities behalf.
If BASC are to enjoy the level of support they seek then only an acceptance and instigation of the changes required will bring that about.
BASC draw a line under tail wags dog and let’s see the work carried out by the significant majority of employees that benefits shooters take precedence over the present political doubletalk surrounding this much debated topic which only serves to create a distorted version of events and to discredit BASC

Absolutely, I don't believe that extravagant claims, excuses and the odd personal insult from BASC adds anything useful to the current situation

John did do a brilliant job and was very well regarded in the UK and overseas and I am glad I had the opportunity to work with him over the years. Just because you think differently does not make it so.

Crikey, just read the minutes of the LAG meetings to find out just what "a brilliant job" John continues to do. Packham and his WJ chums must be well pleased!
This from the WJ website: -" Recent blog by John Swift, chair of LAG, calling for restrictions on use of lead shot and lead bullets for shooting live animals – click here – these are exactly the same measures that Wild Justice supports. It is striking that John is a former Chief Exec of the British Association for Shooting and Conservation"

 

[Spear Chucker]

John did do a brilliant job and was very well regarded in the UK and overseas and I am glad I had the opportunity to work with him over the years. Just because you think differently does not make it so.

Proof of that pudding is in the eating, and for many of your current and former members, that pudding was unpalatable at best.
Your stout defense of the leader of the LAG says it all.

 

[Ruger#1]

Agreed, lead shot is not the biggest cause of mortality - it is 4-7% from UK and France data sets. The chick survival rate is critical to partridge population growth or decline. GWCT research in Britain has shown that the knife edge is circa 32% — above that the population increases, below that figure and the population decreases. So if lead shot ingestion is reducing the chick survival rate by even a few percent that is a significant controllable risk.

As regards lead shot, and sparrowhawks, here is what I replied to you when we last discussed this on the forum:

"Back in the 1960s when research started on the potential environmental impacts of the various 'wonder chemicals' there was sceptiscm and even anger at the idea - it was anti farming, it was communists and so on. Remember the book Silent Spring and the backlash against the author? The Game Conservancy for its part was looking at the impacts on grey partridge, that came in the 1970s I think. Now we take it as fact there is an impact on grey partridge chick survival rates from herbicides and insecticide use. All the research on nesting cover, stubbles, the innovations of beetle banks and so on, all thanks to Game Conservancy research and now embedded in agri-environmental schemes. Lots of things help and hinder grey partridge. Lead shot is on the hinder side and the GWCT has reviewed that evidence. I agree there are bigger impacts on grey partridge. But that's not to say lead shot should be ignored. Every wild bird counts.

As regards sparrowhawks, an intensive study of sparrowhawk and buzzard diet in the breeding season in England found the remains of a grey partridge only once in 73 prey items from five buzzard nests and 295 prey items from five sparrowhawk nests. GWCT did some research also and computer modelling of all data suggested that, at low densities, losses to raptors would result in a 39% reduction in average spring pair density over the long term. Because shooting losses occurred before the peak time for losses to raptors, the two causes of loss were largely additive. Shooting alone at 40% resulted in a 23% reduction over the long term in spring stocks, and shooting and raptors combined reduced spring stocks by 52%. Crucially, the impact of raptor predation was greatest at low partridge density; above approximately five pairs per 100 hectares the impact was much less."

I don't recall anyone on the forum questioning the sparrowhawk data and modelling work, but the partridge data and modelling on lead shot keeps being questioned. That's because we tend to accept without question the science that matches our world views. In other words if one believes that lead shot ingestion either does not happen for grey partridge adults/chicks or if it does, that it does not cause harm, then any research on this is likely to be dismissed for spurious reasons.

Can I ask when BASC’s policy is to oppose further lead shot restrictions why are you permitted to spend the majority of your time and effort making a case for further lead shot restrictions on the flimsiest of grounds ?
It seems that your actions do not reflect the fact that you are in the employ of an organisation whose remit is the protection of fieldsports . As you are demonstrably more concerned with the fate of individual partridge chicks than representing the interests of the shooting community it would seem that you would be more suitably employed in a role in a pure conservation organisation rather than undermining the policies of your employer and failing to give due support to members who indirectly pay your wages.
Why you are able to continue in your present position defies logic and indicates a large disconnect between grass roots shooters expectations and BASC’s ability to provide relevant representation.

 

[Ratel]

Agreed, lead shot is not the biggest cause of mortality - it is 4-7% from UK and France data sets. The chick survival rate is critical to partridge population growth or decline. GWCT research in Britain has shown that the knife edge is circa 32% — above that the population increases, below that figure and the population decreases. So if lead shot ingestion is reducing the chick survival rate by even a few percent that is a significant controllable risk.

As regards lead shot, and sparrowhawks, here is what I replied to you when we last discussed this on the forum:

"Back in the 1960s when research started on the potential environmental impacts of the various 'wonder chemicals' there was sceptiscm and even anger at the idea - it was anti farming, it was communists and so on. Remember the book Silent Spring and the backlash against the author? The Game Conservancy for its part was looking at the impacts on grey partridge, that came in the 1970s I think. Now we take it as fact there is an impact on grey partridge chick survival rates from herbicides and insecticide use. All the research on nesting cover, stubbles, the innovations of beetle banks and so on, all thanks to Game Conservancy research and now embedded in agri-environmental schemes. Lots of things help and hinder grey partridge. Lead shot is on the hinder side and the GWCT has reviewed that evidence. I agree there are bigger impacts on grey partridge. But that's not to say lead shot should be ignored. Every wild bird counts.

As regards sparrowhawks, an intensive study of sparrowhawk and buzzard diet in the breeding season in England found the remains of a grey partridge only once in 73 prey items from five buzzard nests and 295 prey items from five sparrowhawk nests. GWCT did some research also and computer modelling of all data suggested that, at low densities, losses to raptors would result in a 39% reduction in average spring pair density over the long term. Because shooting losses occurred before the peak time for losses to raptors, the two causes of loss were largely additive. Shooting alone at 40% resulted in a 23% reduction over the long term in spring stocks, and shooting and raptors combined reduced spring stocks by 52%. Crucially, the impact of raptor predation was greatest at low partridge density; above approximately five pairs per 100 hectares the impact was much less."

I don't recall anyone on the forum questioning the sparrowhawk data and modelling work, but the partridge data and modelling on lead shot keeps being questioned. That's because we tend to accept without question the science that matches our world views. In other words if one believes that lead shot ingestion either does not happen for grey partridge adults/chicks or if it does, that it does not cause harm, then any research on this is likely to be dismissed for spurious reasons.

Conor this is old reports. From the 70's until now things have changed so much. In the 70's I hadn't seen a buzzard in the midlands or on the Cotswolds. In 2010 travelling Around B'Ham on the 42 I saw 6 buzzards.
Where I am now nobody had seen a buzzard locally and definitely none near Loddington until 2006. I would think my observations and those of other keepers concerning Kites Buzzards and Spars being off the scale locally still proves that lead shot although a slight problem is a miniscule killer of Grey Partridge. Raptors have increased by hundreds of percent but the Boffins and others still think Buzzards and Kites only eat carrion. Sparrowhawks are as he stated Mr Packhams favourite bird so I'm sure they do no harm. Incidentally, that's an awful lot of raptor nests to have been disturbed way back to gain those facts.

 

[Smellydog]

Why do so many put so much faith in science?
Science has got it oh so very wrong many many times!

 

[Spear Chucker]

Can I ask when BASC’s policy is to oppose further lead shot restrictions why are you permitted to spend the majority of your time and effort making a case for further lead shot restrictions on the flimsiest of grounds ?
It seems that your actions do not reflect the fact that you are in the employ of an organisation whose remit is the protection of fieldsports . As you are demonstrably more concerned with the fate of individual partridge chicks than representing the interests of the shooting community it would seem that you would be more suitably employed in a role in a pure conservation organisation rather than undermining the policies of your employer and failing to give due support to members who indirectly pay your wages.
Why you are able to continue in your present position defies logic and indicates a large disconnect between grass roots shooters expectations and BASC’s ability to provide relevant representation.

Well said. I would add that if ethics and animal welfare are actually the issue with lead shot, as Conor seems to imply above, then he should in fact be arguing for the abolition in toto for all game shooting, as steel is absolutely not as good as lead in achieving consistent clean kills on sporting game birds.

 

[Spear Chucker]

Why do so many put so much faith in science?
Science has got it oh so very wrong many many times!

Or been bent to fit an agenda
Simple FOI Requests for Data Said to Back Non-existent Temperature Stations Refused on “Vexatious” Grounds by UK Met Office – The Daily Sceptic Simple FOI Requests for Data Said to Back Non-existent Temperature Stations Refused on “Vexatious” Grounds by UK Met Office – The Daily Sceptic

 

[Conor O'Gorman]

Conor this is old reports. From the 70's until now things have changed so much. In the 70's I hadn't seen a buzzard in the midlands or on the Cotswolds. In 2010 travelling Around B'Ham on the 42 I saw 6 buzzards.
Where I am now nobody had seen a buzzard locally and definitely none near Loddington until 2006. I would think my observations and those of other keepers concerning Kites Buzzards and Spars being off the scale locally still proves that lead shot although a slight problem is a miniscule killer of Grey Partridge. Raptors have increased by hundreds of percent but the Boffins and others still think Buzzards and Kites only eat carrion. Sparrowhawks are as he stated Mr Packhams favourite bird so I'm sure they do no harm. Incidentally, that's an awful lot of raptor nests to have been disturbed way back to gain those facts.

I agree that things have changed so much. The data for the sparrowhawks and grey partridge is however more recent than the 1970s.

The sparrowhawk project started by investigating raptor kill rates and the causes of local extinctions on downland in Sussex. It then developed into a study across 20 sites that contained different densities of raptors and partridges, spread across eight counties from Dorset to Lincolnshire. The aim was to gather information about partridge survival and habitat use from radio-tracking under different levels of raptor predation risk. Researchers spent over 3,149 hours gathering data across 20 sites during the winters of 2000/01, 2001/02 and 2002/03.

Partridges and raptors - Game and Wildlife Conservation Trust

www.gwct.org.uk

The post mortems on grey partridge revealing lead shot ingestion were from 1947 to 1992, where successive pathologists at The Game Conservancy Trust carried out 1,318 post-mortems on adult wild grey partridges found dead in the UK. During a study of chick food from 1968 to 1978 on the Sussex Downs, the gizzards of 29 wild chicks aged up to 6 weeks were also examined.

Dick Pott's analysis of that data showed that the incidence of lead poisoning increased from 1947–1958 to 1963–1992. During 1963–1992, the incidence of lead gunshot ingestion was 4.5±1.0% in adults and 6.9±4.7% in chicks. The weights of individual lead shot in the chick gizzards showed a rapid rate of erosion, indicating a short retention time in the gizzard, as has also been reported for adult waterfowl and game birds.

Dick explained in more detail as follows:

It is remarkable that between 1968 and 1978, two chicks sampled from separate broods on the Sussex Downs had, within 3 weeks of hatching, ingested 13 and 14 lead shot. Moreover, the erosion of the individual shot suggests that they were ingested within a short discrete period of time. Somewhat similarly, a grey partridge in Denmark in 1976 had ingested 34 lead shot, a grey partridge in Wiltshire in 1966, 26 (this study) and a pheasant on the Sussex Downs in 1970, 87. All these cases occurred in a predominantly arable environment where cultivation removes most of the shot from the soil surface.

The measured incidence of lead shot in gizzards considerably underestimates the annual exposure because the shot is retained in the gizzard only for a relatively short period of time. The average erosion of lead in the grey partridge chicks, 55%, is remarkable given that the chicks were aged only 2–3 weeks (18 days) and had presumably not ingested the lead on their first day. The erosion in the chick gizzards is consistent with lead shot loss in adult mallard; mourning dove (Zenaida macroura) and bobwhite quail (Colinus virginianus) and willow grouse (Lagopus lagopus). It follows that the gizzards of some living partridges that contain no lead shot at the time of sampling will probably have contained shot previously.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/225816496_Incidence_of_ingested_lead_gunshot_in_wild_grey_partridges_Perdix_perdix_from_the_UK

As regards the 2016 paper using data to model the impact of lead shot ingestion in the grey partridge population, that was based on data from the Potts UK data from 1947-1992, grey partridge in Scotland from 1997 to 2003, a massive radiotracking project of 1,009 hen greys in France from 1995-1997. The data showed direct mortality from lead shot ingestion at 4% and ultimate mortality from lead shot ingestion at 7%. The population modelling based on that data estimated a reduced population size of partridges by 10% due to lead shot ingestion.

Can Ingestion of Lead Shot and Poisons Change Population Trends of Three European Birds: Grey Partridge, Common Buzzard, and Red Kite?

Little is known about the magnitude of the effects of lead shot ingestion alone or combined with poisons (e.g., in bait or seeds/granules containing pesticides) on population size, growth, and extinction of non-waterbird avian species that ingest these substances. We used population models to...

journals.plos.org

 

[Smellydog]

Or been bent to fit an agenda
Simple FOI Requests for Data Said to Back Non-existent Temperature Stations Refused on “Vexatious” Grounds by UK Met Office – The Daily Sceptic Simple FOI Requests for Data Said to Back Non-existent Temperature Stations Refused on “Vexatious” Grounds by UK Met Office – The Daily Sceptic

Yep, summertime weather maps on TV were green. Similar temps to today only today the maps are red!
Bull $hite Britain and the scientist are the ones stirring it into slurry so it permeates everywhere!

 

[Ruger#1]

I agree that things have changed so much. The data for the sparrowhawks and grey partridge is however more recent than the 1970s.

The sparrowhawk project started by investigating raptor kill rates and the causes of local extinctions on downland in Sussex. It then developed into a study across 20 sites that contained different densities of raptors and partridges, spread across eight counties from Dorset to Lincolnshire. The aim was to gather information about partridge survival and habitat use from radio-tracking under different levels of raptor predation risk. Researchers spent over 3,149 hours gathering data across 20 sites during the winters of 2000/01, 2001/02 and 2002/03.

Partridges and raptors - Game and Wildlife Conservation Trust

www.gwct.org.uk

The post mortems on grey partridge revealing lead shot ingestion were from 1947 to 1992, where successive pathologists at The Game Conservancy Trust carried out 1,318 post-mortems on adult wild grey partridges found dead in the UK. During a study of chick food from 1968 to 1978 on the Sussex Downs, the gizzards of 29 wild chicks aged up to 6 weeks were also examined.

Dick Pott's analysis of that data showed that the incidence of lead poisoning increased from 1947–1958 to 1963–1992. During 1963–1992, the incidence of lead gunshot ingestion was 4.5±1.0% in adults and 6.9±4.7% in chicks. The weights of individual lead shot in the chick gizzards showed a rapid rate of erosion, indicating a short retention time in the gizzard, as has also been reported for adult waterfowl and game birds.

Dick explained in more detail as follows:

It is remarkable that between 1968 and 1978, two chicks sampled from separate broods on the Sussex Downs had, within 3 weeks of hatching, ingested 13 and 14 lead shot. Moreover, the erosion of the individual shot suggests that they were ingested within a short discrete period of time. Somewhat similarly, a grey partridge in Denmark in 1976 had ingested 34 lead shot, a grey partridge in Wiltshire in 1966, 26 (this study) and a pheasant on the Sussex Downs in 1970, 87. All these cases occurred in a predominantly arable environment where cultivation removes most of the shot from the soil surface.

The measured incidence of lead shot in gizzards considerably underestimates the annual exposure because the shot is retained in the gizzard only for a relatively short period of time. The average erosion of lead in the grey partridge chicks, 55%, is remarkable given that the chicks were aged only 2–3 weeks (18 days) and had presumably not ingested the lead on their first day. The erosion in the chick gizzards is consistent with lead shot loss in adult mallard; mourning dove (Zenaida macroura) and bobwhite quail (Colinus virginianus) and willow grouse (Lagopus lagopus). It follows that the gizzards of some living partridges that contain no lead shot at the time of sampling will probably have contained shot previously.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/225816496_Incidence_of_ingested_lead_gunshot_in_wild_grey_partridges_Perdix_perdix_from_the_UK

As regards the 2016 paper using data to model the impact of lead shot ingestion in the grey partridge population, that was based on data from the Potts UK data from 1947-1992, grey partridge in Scotland from 1997 to 2003, a massive radiotracking project of 1,009 hen greys in France from 1995-1997. The data showed direct mortality from lead shot ingestion at 4% and ultimate mortality from lead shot ingestion at 7%. The population modelling based on that data estimated a reduced population size of partridges by 10% due to lead shot ingestion.

Can Ingestion of Lead Shot and Poisons Change Population Trends of Three European Birds: Grey Partridge, Common Buzzard, and Red Kite?

Little is known about the magnitude of the effects of lead shot ingestion alone or combined with poisons (e.g., in bait or seeds/granules containing pesticides) on population size, growth, and extinction of non-waterbird avian species that ingest these substances. We used population models to...

journals.plos.org

BASC in action actively opposing lead shot restrictions as it supposedly has done for forty years if you believe the rhetoric. I think in this case actions definitely speak louder than words.
It seems that rather than uphold the “official “policy of BASC C O’G prefers to walk in the footsteps of John Swift and sell out the present day shooters that pay his wages . The continuation of his personal crusade can only harm the prospects of future negotiations prior to the introduction of legislation . At what point does BASC concede that their representative is a liability and no longer an asset or are the opinions expressed contradicting BASC policy actually a reflection of BASC intent to quietly drop any opposition to further lead shot restrictions.
Having just processed renewal for my wildfowling club membership I will now be investigating the possibility of excluding BASC membership fees which are included in membership .In light of the stance taken by BASC and its representative on this whole issue I see no other option.
I can’t see how anyone could defend continued membership in light of the poor representation on offer I’m pleased such extreme behaviour has made the decision such an easy one.

 

[Ratel]

I agree that things have changed so much. The data for the sparrowhawks and grey partridge is however more recent than the 1970s.

The sparrowhawk project started by investigating raptor kill rates and the causes of local extinctions on downland in Sussex. It then developed into a study across 20 sites that contained different densities of raptors and partridges, spread across eight counties from Dorset to Lincolnshire. The aim was to gather information about partridge survival and habitat use from radio-tracking under different levels of raptor predation risk. Researchers spent over 3,149 hours gathering data across 20 sites during the winters of 2000/01, 2001/02 and 2002/03.

Partridges and raptors - Game and Wildlife Conservation Trust

www.gwct.org.uk

The post mortems on grey partridge revealing lead shot ingestion were from 1947 to 1992, where successive pathologists at The Game Conservancy Trust carried out 1,318 post-mortems on adult wild grey partridges found dead in the UK. During a study of chick food from 1968 to 1978 on the Sussex Downs, the gizzards of 29 wild chicks aged up to 6 weeks were also examined.

Dick Pott's analysis of that data showed that the incidence of lead poisoning increased from 1947–1958 to 1963–1992. During 1963–1992, the incidence of lead gunshot ingestion was 4.5±1.0% in adults and 6.9±4.7% in chicks. The weights of individual lead shot in the chick gizzards showed a rapid rate of erosion, indicating a short retention time in the gizzard, as has also been reported for adult waterfowl and game birds.

Dick explained in more detail as follows:

It is remarkable that between 1968 and 1978, two chicks sampled from separate broods on the Sussex Downs had, within 3 weeks of hatching, ingested 13 and 14 lead shot. Moreover, the erosion of the individual shot suggests that they were ingested within a short discrete period of time. Somewhat similarly, a grey partridge in Denmark in 1976 had ingested 34 lead shot, a grey partridge in Wiltshire in 1966, 26 (this study) and a pheasant on the Sussex Downs in 1970, 87. All these cases occurred in a predominantly arable environment where cultivation removes most of the shot from the soil surface.

The measured incidence of lead shot in gizzards considerably underestimates the annual exposure because the shot is retained in the gizzard only for a relatively short period of time. The average erosion of lead in the grey partridge chicks, 55%, is remarkable given that the chicks were aged only 2–3 weeks (18 days) and had presumably not ingested the lead on their first day. The erosion in the chick gizzards is consistent with lead shot loss in adult mallard; mourning dove (Zenaida macroura) and bobwhite quail (Colinus virginianus) and willow grouse (Lagopus lagopus). It follows that the gizzards of some living partridges that contain no lead shot at the time of sampling will probably have contained shot previously.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/225816496_Incidence_of_ingested_lead_gunshot_in_wild_grey_partridges_Perdix_perdix_from_the_UK

As regards the 2016 paper using data to model the impact of lead shot ingestion in the grey partridge population, that was based on data from the Potts UK data from 1947-1992, grey partridge in Scotland from 1997 to 2003, a massive radiotracking project of 1,009 hen greys in France from 1995-1997. The data showed direct mortality from lead shot ingestion at 4% and ultimate mortality from lead shot ingestion at 7%. The population modelling based on that data estimated a reduced population size of partridges by 10% due to lead shot ingestion.

Can Ingestion of Lead Shot and Poisons Change Population Trends of Three European Birds: Grey Partridge, Common Buzzard, and Red Kite?

Little is known about the magnitude of the effects of lead shot ingestion alone or combined with poisons (e.g., in bait or seeds/granules containing pesticides) on population size, growth, and extinction of non-waterbird avian species that ingest these substances. We used population models to...

journals.plos.org

All interesting stuff Conor, but just take note that raptor predation according to Game Con
has far more effect on numbers where there are less pairs which is the case in most areas. I find it quite strange that lead shot ingestion seems to be more prevalent in the late 20th century than it was the 200 years before that. I also feel that buzzard and Kite predation is far worse than most conservation opinions think. Having had a Hen Harrier visit and also seen the results elsewhere on a friend's estate I hope we never get another occurrence as it wiped a covey out in my case.

 

[User00056]

And the GWCT is the science behind it

Well, they like to think they are.