Latest article on lead micro and nano particles in deer and grouse

[Woodenbeam]

How do you know that it was not x rayed and and subsequently processed?
It’s perfectly representative of many carcasses that have and continue to be in my experience. A walk through your local game processors cold room will confirm what I say.

It certainly would not be if you left the contamination there and didn’t adequately cook the meat. That’s why we take it out.
The lead stays in.

That perfectly sums up many of your arguments.
For example, you constantly tout the ballistic superiority of lead, which is true, provided that ballistic superiority is all you concern yourself with. However you ignore the proven toxicity of lead and you also ignore that the alternatives to lead are proven to be perfectly adequate for harvesting game.
Your whole argument that lead is “ better “ is based on ignoring leads proven toxicity to humans and to wildlife purely because it has demonstrably better ballistic performance?
The practical ballistic advantage of lead only exists at extended ranges and ends as soon as the target is struck and becomes contaminated by lead residue .
For deer stalking, lead alternatives are good enough. They’re good enough for birds too.

Lead alternatives are good enough………….
Didn’t I see a clip recently saying that said alternatives were in short supply due to demand elsewhere?
Now that’s a really well thought out plan in the utopia where some would like to be
Back in the real world I’m still waiting for the penny to drop that we should be concerning ourselves with far more important things

 

[Norfolk Deer Search]

This is all getting very boring now!

It’s as simple as this- you want to shoot lead and reload get stocking up and buy as many as you can lay your mits on.

Personally I’ve now got enough 7mm Gamekings for 10 years.

 

[Spear Chucker]

Faggots and peas anyone?
How about some haggis?

Do me a favour and fcuk off and troll someone else for a bit, wil ya?
I’m celebrating the birth of my beautiful new granddaughter today.
I’m just not in the mood for your quasi legalistic, quasi scientific bolloxology.

Congratulations on the good news...but Wow! And you did engage...on a forum where this subject raises temperatures pretty quickly.
All we need now is Princess Poppy threatening to dob us all in to the rozzers, because as we all know, anyone disagreeing with her is clearly unbalanced to the degree of not being trustworthy with a wooden spoon.

 

[MilesW]

It’s as simple as this- you want to shoot lead and reload get stocking up and buy as many as you can lay your mits on.

Personally I’ve now got enough 7mm Gamekings for 10 years.

Seems a bit half hearted

 

[Norfolk Deer Search]

Seems a bit half hearted

In 10 years I’ll be 55 and buggered!

Time to become a proper lazy bum carp angler

Plus I’ve got an ambition to catch wild carp from the northern Swedish rivers

 

[Spear Chucker]

In 10 years I’ll be 55 and buggered!

Time to become a proper lazy bum carp angler

Plus I’ve got an ambition to catch wild carp from the northern Swedish rivers

Easy tiger! I am 54, had a hard paper round and still hope to be a pain in the backside here and in the field for at least another 25 years. I'll probably get hit by a camel tomorrow now!

 

[Norfolk Deer Search]

Easy tiger! I am 54, had a hard paper round and still hope to be a pain in the backside here and in the field for at least another 25 years. I'll probably get hit by a camel tomorrow now!

Amen

 

[GlennUK]

Probably referring to the difference in mass? IE lead much heavier so for a given weight lead bullets are smaller and therefore less prone to drag an other factors?

It’s commonly recommended to go down a bullet weight when swapping lead free bullets, however lighter bullets don’t retain as much energy at range?

Could be although for a given calibre the csa will be the same, shape of the nose of the bullet may vary of course. The energy down range wont that be a funciton of the mass x velocity? i.e. a higher velocity for a smaller projectile may well be the same as that for a heavier slower bullet?

 

[GlennUK]

Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying. Ballistic coefficient in copper bullets tends to be considerably lower than their lead counterpart. With copper being lighter than lead, the bullets need to be longer to be the same weight.
A direct comparison is here -
Hornady 130g eldm - 1.31inch G70.279
Hornady 130g CX (copper) - 1.49inch, G70.246

Both 130g bullets, both with the same polymer tip, huge difference in ballistic coefficient and that subsequently translates to more drag. Add in the copper is harder naturally and you've created a bullet that will perform at a couple hundred yards but because of the 2200fps ish minimum expansion, much further past that and it will pencil through the animal.

Again, some bullets now expand down to 1800fps if not a bit lower but these bullets tend to shed petals everywhere or fragment on impact which is apparently bad for ingestion

in the interest of learning a bit more I found this paper https://connectsci.au/wr/article/52/9/WR25081/200726/Assessing-the-long-range-performance-of-copper

 

[Smellydog]

In 10 years I’ll be 55 and buggered!

Time to become a proper lazy bum carp angler

Plus I’ve got an ambition to catch wild carp from the northern Swedish rivers

I'm 58 now.....
Thanks .
I'm off to fondle my lead stash....

 

[Apthorpe]

in the interest of learning a bit more I found this paper https://connectsci.au/wr/article/52/9/WR25081/200726/Assessing-the-long-range-performance-of-copper

And the paper shows that only 54% of the animals were killed with one shot. There is no information on how far they ran or how long they took to die. Not an acceptable situation this side of the pond. The paper also includes data from only three rifles each firing a single load. The sample size is therefore too low to be of much more than anecdotal interest.

As I have repeatedly done before, I urge you to read up on the basics first, because comments above indicate persistent gaps at elementary levels.

 

[Chris Richardson]

And the paper shows that only 54% of the animals were killed with one shot. There is no information on how far they ran or how long they took to die. Not an acceptable situation this side of the pond. The paper also includes data from only three rifles each firing a single load. The sample size is therefore too low to be of much more than anecdotal interest.

As I have repeatedly done before, I urge you to read up on the basics first, because comments above indicate persistent gaps at elementary levels.

Another product of the instant expert dsc system I suspect

 

[GlennUK]

And the paper shows that only 54% of the animals were killed with one shot. There is no information on how far they ran or how long they took to die. Not an acceptable situation this side of the pond. The paper also includes data from only three rifles each firing a single load. The sample size is therefore too low to be of much more than anecdotal interest.

As I have repeatedly done before, I urge you to read up on the basics first, because comments above indicate persistent gaps at elementary level

I post a link to a paper which you decide, based on your 'ballistic expertise and engineering knowledge' that its not worth anything but AFAIK you have posted nothing of relevance in this discussion beyond your own thoughts.

How seriously we should take your thoughts is a matter for debate, your science degree is it relevant to ballistics or engineering in any way shape or form? #askingforafriend

FWIW, the paper was interesting because it was founded on experience of the use of copper in real situations and at relatively long ranges, from a UK perspective., one of the conclusions was that shot placement is likley the most important factor in the kill, something i and others have pointed out, whatever ammunition is used.

The section which refers to flights distances might be relevant since you obviously either did not read the paper, or did not understand it given your comments re how far they ran.

The paper by default is limited in some areas based on how the data is gathered and they are set out, if you'd like to post a link to a paper which highlights any of the issues you refer to be great to see.

 

[GlennUK]

Another product of the instant expert dsc system I suspect

As you know form previous posts i do not claim to be any kind of expert in the field of stalking/ballistics.

Unlike some on here

 

[palmer_mike]

i do not claim to be any kind of expert in the field of stalking/ballistics.

maybe time to stop expressing an opinion then?

 

[GlennUK]

maybe time to stop expressing an opinion then?

Thanks your views are duly noted.

Self proclaiming expertise is rarely a good recommendation worth relying on

On this forum (like most others I have ever been on) there are those who have relevant expertise but rarely shout about it, then there are the rest who have none, and like to tell others that their questions or thoughts are stupid of wrong.

I see no evidence that many of those on here spouting stuff about ballistics/lead poisoning should be believed simply because they would have you believe they are 'experts'.

If anyone has any evidence to support their position post it.

 

[Norfolk Deer Search]

Thanks your views are duly noted.

Self proclaiming expertise is rarely a good recommendation worth relying on

On this forum (like most others I have ever been on) there are those who have relevant expertise but rarely shout about it, then there are the rest who have none, and like to tell others that their questions or thoughts are stupid of wrong.

I see no evidence that many of those on here spouting stuff about ballistics/lead poisoning should be believed simply because they would have you believe they are 'experts'.

If anyone has any evidence to support their position post it.

What you have to realise about this evidence is 9 out of 10 times it is an opinion by people that don’t do the job, never have done the job and probably have no intention of doing the job!

As stated many many times on here before the micro particles of lead in a carcass in my personal opinion is a very very minimal risk, to my knowledge and three research of the Internet. Nobody has died of lead poisoning from shot game that is fact!

Will anybody die from shot game?

I expect if you did the same survey in 100 years time the answer would still be no

So my personal opinion, it’s nothing but a load of bollocks

 

[GlennUK]

Holding contrary opinions is not an issue for most.

Most of us are doing the same, whether it is based on evidence or not is another matter.

Most dont seek to belittle others based on their own (largely unevidenced) 'expertise'.

Take the article i posted re the efficacy of copper, there is a specific section which talks about how the shot animals respond to being shot, referenced as flight distance.

The article highlights how the evidence was obtained, etc, etc.

I did not say there you go this is proof that copper is brilliant, merely that it is interesting information. one of the key conclusions is that shot placement is key to the humane dispatch of deer, something which is not controversial i would have thought whether one uses lead or lead-free.

It was 'critiqued' in a fashion that suggests that the critic did not read the article thoroughly and failed to understand it.

It was not posted as the last word, merely something i found that i thought was interesting, if there are other articles which prove otherwise happy to see them and take that info on board.

 

[Heym SR20]

What you have to realise about this evidence is 9 out of 10 times it is an opinion by people that don’t do the job, never have done the job and probably have no intention of doing the job!

As stated many many times on here before the micro particles of lead in a carcass in my personal opinion is a very very minimal risk, to my knowledge and three research of the Internet. Nobody has died of lead poisoning from shot game that is fact!

Will anybody die from shot game?

I expect if you did the same survey in 100 years time the answer would still be no

So my personal opinion, it’s nothing but a load of bollocks

Fact - nobody has died from eating lead shot game. - how can you support this fact?

Frankly the views expressed are pretty much now irrelevant. The powers that be - ie the Health and Safety Executive and the UK Reach regulations have taken the view that lead should be removed from the environment and that there is no safe level of exposure.

The NRA has been able to demonstrate that target shooting into bullet catchers has minimal effects on the wider environment provided the butts are regularly deleaded and thus can continue.

But the wider shooting community has not been able to demonstrate or provide evidence to the enquiries that lead in the wider environment is not harmful.

In the opinion of the Government Minister in the decision to ban lead on page 2, clause 6

“Lead is a toxic element……..No safe concentration level of lead exist, lead always has a negative effect on human health”

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/686d2e3681dd8f70f5de3c92/UK_REACH_restriction_report_lead_in_ammunition.pdf

You, along with many of us, have been using lead free bullets for many years. Steel shot has been used over wetlands and for bird shooting in many other countries for decades. They work. Yes they have their limitations at the extremes of range and might not yet be readily available in all calibres and bores so we might have to make adjustments.

But as part of the shooting and conservation community - and yes they go absolutely hand in hand, I cannot understand some elements of the community are so resistant to switching away from using a material that causes great harm.

Or is it simply that such individuals don’t care about the effect of their shooting has on others and the wider environment.

We do live in a society that is anti shooting. We do need to bring the rest of society with us. But how can we do so when on a shoot day we scatter on of the most toxic elements known to man widely across our countryside??

130 years ago game keepers pretty much made extinct many bird species, in particular birds of prey, from the British Countryside. Now most Game Keeper’s are the custodians of the country side and we quite rightly are proud of the work that has been done bringing back harriers, ospreys etc to the British countryside. Yet will still put 30grams of lead shot into the environment everytime we squeeze the trigger.

That lead goes into the environment - it breaks down into our soils, is picked up by organisms and gets into the food chain. Studies of woodcock have shown they eating worms with high lead content.

Lead is no longer getting onto our fields and woods from lead in fuels, lead levels in agro chemicals and fertilisers are non existent. The only source is from shooting.

The shooting organisations pushed for a voluntary change in our behaviour. Some did, but many shooters just want ti carry on. The HSE in their reports suggest that the shooting community cannot self regulate, hence the reasoning for the complete ban on most uses of lead ammunition.

Clay pigeon shooting could easily continue using lead, but the opinion of government is that many will simply clay cartridges to shoot game. Given the views of many on here, I cannot blame the powers that be for taking this view and banning the sale and use of all lead shot cartridges.

 

[hendrix's rifle]

Fact - nobody has died from eating lead shot game. - how can you support this fact?

Frankly the views expressed are pretty much now irrelevant. The powers that be - ie the Health and Safety Executive and the UK Reach regulations have taken the view that lead should be removed from the environment and that there is no safe level of exposure.

The NRA has been able to demonstrate that target shooting into bullet catchers has minimal effects on the wider environment provided the butts are regularly deleaded and thus can continue.

But the wider shooting community has not been able to demonstrate or provide evidence to the enquiries that lead in the wider environment is not harmful.

In the opinion of the Government Minister in the decision to ban lead on page 2, clause 6

“Lead is a toxic element……..No safe concentration level of lead exist, lead always has a negative effect on human health”

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/686d2e3681dd8f70f5de3c92/UK_REACH_restriction_report_lead_in_ammunition.pdf

You, along with many of us, have been using lead free bullets for many years. Steel shot has been used over wetlands and for bird shooting in many other countries for decades. They work. Yes they have their limitations at the extremes of range and might not yet be readily available in all calibres and bores so we might have to make adjustments.

But as part of the shooting and conservation community - and yes they go absolutely hand in hand, I cannot understand some elements of the community are so resistant to switching away from using a material that causes great harm.

Or is it simply that such individuals don’t care about the effect of their shooting has on others and the wider environment.

We do live in a society that is anti shooting. We do need to bring the rest of society with us. But how can we do so when on a shoot day we scatter on of the most toxic elements known to man widely across our countryside??

130 years ago game keepers pretty much made extinct many bird species, in particular birds of prey, from the British Countryside. Now most Game Keeper’s are the custodians of the country side and we quite rightly are proud of the work that has been done bringing back harriers, ospreys etc to the British countryside. Yet will still put 30grams of lead shot into the environment everytime we squeeze the trigger.

That lead goes into the environment - it breaks down into our soils, is picked up by organisms and gets into the food chain. Studies of woodcock have shown they eating worms with high lead content.

Lead is no longer getting onto our fields and woods from lead in fuels, lead levels in agro chemicals and fertilisers are non existent. The only source is from shooting.

The shooting organisations pushed for a voluntary change in our behaviour. Some did, but many shooters just want ti carry on. The HSE in their reports suggest that the shooting community cannot self regulate, hence the reasoning for the complete ban on most uses of lead ammunition.

Clay pigeon shooting could easily continue using lead, but the opinion of government is that many will simply clay cartridges to shoot game. Given the views of many on here, I cannot blame the powers that be for taking this view and banning the sale and use of all lead shot cartridges.

Are you an anti? You seem to argue like one and have many other similarities to them? You seem to want shooting to go down the pan like them?