There were some very bad tempered exchanges between the scientists. Peter Green presented logical and (as far as I understood) peer reviewed science whereas the RSPB presented pseudo science. There were no controls in the RSPB data and quite how anyone measures 'accuracy' on a live target with a kill zone the size of a dinner plate is beyond me...
What was most worrying was that BASCs Dr John Harradine (he's the one pictured in ST looking wrong footed and confused) was wrong footed and confused at the conference by a Norwegian chap and his questions. These were roughly based on the differences in bullet construction and their consequent performance on target.
Dr Harradines reply was muddled and showed an appalling lack of knowledge at the most basic level. Problem is that he's one of the guys who will be at the forefron of any emerging policy. Deep joy
The other big problem was that John Swift (head of the supposed voice of shooting) stifled debate.
A very pertinent point was raised by David Kenyon of BDS which roughly paraphrased asked why BASC were in support of a movement to ban lead based on an animal rights agenda (presumably reffering to RSPB and RSPCA). Mr Swift was quick to gloss over this question....
At the end of the session there were a good number of us who were quite simply incandescent.
Quite what any of us will be able to do about it is another matter?
It seems that with the RSPB setting the precedent we have had the rug pulled out from under our feet. There have been no objective studies of the performance of the various bullets on deer. No comparison between bonded bullets, hollowpoints, gmx barnes etc.
There has been no proven need to change, yet here we are with an agenda being promoted by the RSPB and seemingly BASC.
Chances of a fair hearing?
Virtually zero.