An huge own goal by the Shooting Organizations - the lead farce

[Rewulf]

for example this recent study of geese on Islay in Scotland https://pureadmin.uhi.ac.uk/ws/portalfiles/portal/38784090/120_Ibis_Geese_on_Islay_Pb_shot.pdf

From the study conclusion.

In the UK, the risk of lead poisoning in wildfowl due to ingestion of spent lead shot persists(Newth et al. 2012), with lead shot ingestion estimated to kill 50 000–100 000 wildfowl in the UK every winter (Mateo 2009, Pain et al. 2015, Green& Pain 2016). Phasing out the use of lead shot,specifically in wetlands, is widely recognized as acritical solution in protecting numerous species and has recently been brought into practice by the European Union, with many countries also implementing further legislation and regulations to limit its use (Avery & Watson 2009, Mateo 2009, Pain et al. 2019). The results of this study demonstrate how banning the use of lead shot in Ramsar wetlands that encompass key roosting sites with high compliance and enforcement can minimize but not eliminate lead shot ingestion. Therefore, the recent European Union ban on lead shot use over wetlands may reduce lead ingestion in waterfowl but, because foraging occurs outside wetlands for many waterfowl species, further restrictions covering additional key foraging sites may help to mitigate the future risk of lead poisoning. The enforcement of such lead shot bans is also key, with a voluntary phasing out of lead-based ammunition for wild-shot game birds (e.g. Common Pheasants Phasianus colchicus) so far proving ineffective because of very low compliance (Greenet al. 2021, 2022). Going forward, safeguarding wildfowl from lead could benefit from greater spatial restrictions on the use of lead shot and further monitoring of shooting and hunting practices to ensure high compliance rates with legislation

 

[Conor O'Gorman]

You say saving.

Where is the corresponding increase in population?

Courtesy of AI (please find me a study that shows duck population increasing after a lead ammunition ban)

A 2022 study published in Wildlife Biology analyzed 37 years of waterfowl harvest data in Illinois, USA, focusing on the effects of a lead shot ban implemented in the early 1990s. The researchers found that the average annual duck harvest increased by 27% after the ban, indicating a rise in duck populations. Additionally, the study observed a significant decrease in crippling rates (ducks wounded but not retrieved), dropping from 23% to 15% post-ban. This suggests that the use of non-lead ammunition not only reduced lead poisoning but also improved hunting efficiency and waterfowl survival rates.

Furthermore, data from Oklahoma State University Extension supports these findings, reporting that the U.S. ban on lead shot for waterfowl hunting has led to a 50% reduction in lead ingestion by waterfowl, saving an estimated 1.4 million ducks annually.

These studies provide evidence that banning lead ammunition can have positive effects on duck populations, both by reducing mortality from lead poisoning and improving overall survival rates.

 

[Bowland blades]

You say saving.

Where is the corresponding increase in population?

LOL Americans have shot lead over the same grounds for hundreds of years (as have we in the UK) Any claim about getting more duck ? Pure, utter BS ! Only the most gullible could actually swallow that Porkie-Pie
Lead ban having real impact on duck on well established wetlands ? Well it aint because of lead no longer taking in lead as grit etc. I think some folks need to sort and remove the BS , if they really care for truth over PR

 

[Conor O'Gorman]

Thank you for this. Aside from the fact that it’s a good six hour round trip away, the details in your link make plain that lead “alternatives” are all unsuitable for my guns. It doesn’t even make clear what the “alternatives” are, nor whether they are actually an alternative or a functionally-inferior substitute. How does this make “all these concerns dissipate”? Actually, all it has done is increase them.

Incidentally, I don’t think many rational people are going to spend an entire day off work and spend a couple of hundred quid on spec without knowing what they're going to be testing, but a pleasant day out for those with time on their hands.

That's your choice and view which is fine by me. Thousands of shooters have attended the events over the last 5 years and found them helpful. BASC will keep running them as part of the ongoing voluntary transition away from lead shot for live quarry shooting.

 

[Conor O'Gorman]

Another review courtesy of AI:

Illinois Waterfowl Harvest and Crippling Rates (Ellis & Miller, 2022)​

A 2022 study analyzed 37 years of waterfowl harvest data in Illinois, focusing on the effects of a lead shot ban implemented in the early 1990s. The researchers found that the average annual duck harvest increased by 27% after the ban, indicating a rise in duck populations. Additionally, the study observed a significant decrease in crippling rates (ducks wounded but not retrieved), dropping from 23% to 15% post-ban. This suggests that the use of non-lead ammunition not only reduced lead poisoning but also improved hunting efficiency and waterfowl survival rates .

Lead Exposure in American Black Ducks (Samuel & Bowers, 2000)​

This study compared the prevalence of lead exposure in American black ducks wintering in Tennessee before (1986–88) and after (1997–99) the nationwide ban on lead shot in 1991. The prevalence of elevated blood lead levels declined by 44%, from 11.7% to 6.5%, with adult ducks showing a more pronounced reduction. This indicates a significant decrease in lead exposure among black ducks following the implementation of non-toxic shot regulations

Blood Lead Declines in New Jersey Black Ducks (Lewis et al., 2021)​

A study comparing blood lead levels in American black ducks in New Jersey between 1978 and 2017 found a nearly fourfold decline in the prevalence of elevated blood lead levels, from 79% to 20%. The prevalence of ducks with blood lead levels indicating clinical toxicity (>1.0 ppm) declined from 19% in 1978 to 1% in 2017. These findings provide further evidence that the ban on the use of lead shot has resulted in lower blood lead levels in waterfowl .

AI assessment of the studies:

These studies collectively demonstrate that the implementation of non-toxic shot regulations in the United States has led to:

• Significant reductions in lead exposure among waterfowl populations.
• Decreases in crippling rates, indicating improved hunting efficiency and animal welfare.
• Potential increases in waterfowl populations, as evidenced by higher harvest numbers post-ban.

These findings underscore the positive impact of lead shot bans on waterfowl health and population dynamics.

 

[terrier1]

An huge own goal by the Shooting Organizations - the lead farce

This is the title of this thread and I don't believe Connor is getting the point.
As I have said previous in previous threads 20 years ago all my shooting Friends were members of BASC and now none of them are members and are all still Shooting this is mainly because they have been misrepresented and they are not happy with the way BASC has conducting themselves.
I believe a lead ban will be another nail in the coffin of a ban on shooting sports across the country and I believe alot of BASC members will not know much about what is going on until it happens as most of them obviously throw the BASC magazine straight into the recycling bin without reading any information that they are trying to pedal.
All the anti shooting organizations must be laughing their socks off as a shooting organisations is doing their work for them.

 

[Conor O'Gorman]

Enforcement is patchy.
I heard of one shoot in the West that was instructed to use non toxic, the Ranger turned up on the shoot day and checked. I personally got checked before my annual assault on the grouse, I had some steel and all was good.
Most of our shooting is walked up rough sport, it will take a while for a full transition because most of us don’t fire many shots over the course of a season, as lead cartridges are used and replaced the alternatives will roll out.
The big commercial shoots are sticking with lead, at least for the moment.
NPWS has beefed up its recruitment, no doubt this will result in more boots on the ground.
Hunter education has been very much neglected, a lot of people remain unaware of the restrictions despite them being on the books for 3 years? ( I think its 3, but they weren’t being enforced initially due to an industrial relations issue).
We have a history of lax enforcement, particularly by NPWS, unless and until that changes, the transition will be optional for most of us and of indefinite duration.

Thanks that is an interesting insight.

 

[Conor O'Gorman]

Banzai

That was comment number 500 in this thread. Who knows we might make it to ten thousand...

 

[Conor O'Gorman]

An huge own goal by the Shooting Organizations - the lead farce

This is the title of this thread and I don't believe Connor is getting the point.
As I have said previous in previous threads 20 years ago all my shooting Friends were members of BASC and now none of them are members and are all still Shooting this is mainly because they have been misrepresented and they are not happy with the way BASC has conducting themselves.
I believe a lead ban will be another nail in the coffin of a ban on shooting sports across the country and I believe alot of BASC members will not know much about what is going on until it happens as most of them obviously throw the BASC magazine straight into the recycling bin without reading any information that they are trying to pedal.
All the anti shooting organizations must be laughing their socks off as a shooting organisations is doing their work for them.

20 years of misspelling my name...

Anyway, here is a 2020 article you may have missed the first few times around that mentions external views of BASC for successfully defending against lead bans for so many decades.

Lead Shot: A Historical Reflection

In this blog, BASC Scotland director, Dr Colin Shedden, explores BASC’s long-standing involvement with lead shot and how the policy and science has evolved over the years.

basc.org.uk

Two snippets from it in case you don't have time to read it in full:

There is little recognition or thanks for what we have done in the past; for wildfowlers, inland duck shooters, pigeon shooters, game shooters, or even a realisation that we are currently in a really strong position.

For those who say that lead has never poisoned a duck or goose, I would just say that our wildfowling officers were on holiday on the Tay Estuary in January and saw some greylag geese behaving abnormally. They shot one and their dogs retrieved two. They dropped them in at WWT Slimbridge and the analysis showed that their symptoms were consistent with lead poisoning. Blood and tissue analyse also confirmed this. They had ingested lead pellets and were destined to die on the Tay.

 

[terrier1]

Anyway, here is a 2020 article you may have missed the first few times around that mentions external views of BASC for successfully defending against lead bans for so many decades.
BUT YOU ARE NOT NOW ARE YOU.

 

[Ruger#1]

From memory, they didn’t actually oppose restrictions, they just didn’t see a pressing need to introduce them at that time.
Now they do.

Not according to sources outwith your memory

 

[Rewulf]

20 years of miss-spelling my name..

Another insult and personal attack ?

They shot one and their dogs retrieved two. They dropped them in at WWT Slimbridge and the analysis showed that their symptoms were consistent with lead poisoning. Blood and tissue analyse also confirmed this. They had ingested lead pellets and were destined to die on the Tay.

Well it was definitely destined to die on the Tay, they shot it
More 'conclusive evidence' of the perils of using lead shot, when the law already bans the use of lead shot over wetlands.

 

[Ruger#1]

Correct, I don’t agree with this legislation

Foe someone who doesn’t agree with it you spend a lot of time defending it .

 

[Ruger#1]

particularly don’t want to waste my time on a needless spat that I can’t win.

Said every person that just couldn’t be bothered sticking up for their principles.

 

[Bowland blades]

Another review courtesy of AI:

Illinois Waterfowl Harvest and Crippling Rates (Ellis & Miller, 2022)​

A 2022 study analyzed 37 years of waterfowl harvest data in Illinois, focusing on the effects of a lead shot ban implemented in the early 1990s. The researchers found that the average annual duck harvest increased by 27% after the ban, indicating a rise in duck populations. Additionally, the study observed a significant decrease in crippling rates (ducks wounded but not retrieved), dropping from 23% to 15% post-ban. This suggests that the use of non-lead ammunition not only reduced lead poisoning but also improved hunting efficiency and waterfowl survival rates .

Lead Exposure in American Black Ducks (Samuel & Bowers, 2000)​

This study compared the prevalence of lead exposure in American black ducks wintering in Tennessee before (1986–88) and after (1997–99) the nationwide ban on lead shot in 1991. The prevalence of elevated blood lead levels declined by 44%, from 11.7% to 6.5%, with adult ducks showing a more pronounced reduction. This indicates a significant decrease in lead exposure among black ducks following the implementation of non-toxic shot regulations

Blood Lead Declines in New Jersey Black Ducks (Lewis et al., 2021)​

A study comparing blood lead levels in American black ducks in New Jersey between 1978 and 2017 found a nearly fourfold decline in the prevalence of elevated blood lead levels, from 79% to 20%. The prevalence of ducks with blood lead levels indicating clinical toxicity (>1.0 ppm) declined from 19% in 1978 to 1% in 2017. These findings provide further evidence that the ban on the use of lead shot has resulted in lower blood lead levels in waterfowl .

AI assessment of the studies:

These studies collectively demonstrate that the implementation of non-toxic shot regulations in the United States has led to:

• Significant reductions in lead exposure among waterfowl populations.
• Decreases in crippling rates, indicating improved hunting efficiency and animal welfare.
• Potential increases in waterfowl populations, as evidenced by higher harvest numbers post-ban.

These findings underscore the positive impact of lead shot bans on waterfowl health and population dynamics.

I make this clear in a very obvious way - if the wetland was open to shooting for many years (in our case in England /Scotland) there will be tonnes of it . If its a fairly newly created then there will be less if its a wetland created after the Ban in the USA obbiously there should be no lead shot !
On UK traditional wildfowling ground ( and puntguning) the tides move the sands . Lead does not go away and the sands move it constantly , whole sunken ships appear and then go away again after a storm or storms.
Places like the Lune in Lancashire had a very active amount of punt gunning , one shot would be more shot than a wildfowler with a 12 bore might fire in a couple of seasons.
I cannot compare any of these places in the usa but i sure know they are nothing like UK wildfowling marshes.

 

[Crunchy Peanut Butter]

What is the record thread length? Surely 26 pages is a contender?

 

[Ruger#1]

Anyway, here is a 2020 article you may have missed the first few times around that mentions external views of BASC for successfully defending against lead bans for so many decades.

Now sadly tarnished as mentioned earlier by the profusion of non conclusive studies on lead shot ingestion flooded onto forums in a desperate bid to justify the failed voluntary move away from lead shot but in reality a big boost for the anti lead shot lobby and a massive boost for anti field sport supporters..

 

[Ruger#1]

There is little recognition or thanks for what we have done in the past; for wildfowlers, inland duck shooters, pigeon shooters, game shooters, or even a realisation that we are currently in a really strong position

Perhaps there is little recognition,despite shouting perceived past achievements from the roof tops, because you invariably claim sole responsibility when investigation proves that BASC is usually only a part contributor. It may also ,and perhaps more likely, be because shooters in general don’t consider you worthy of mention. You are employed after all and most people aren’t continually praised for carrying out the job they are paid to do. A decent wage for passing time on a shooting forum, great work if you can find someone gullible enough to pay you to do it. Perhaps LACS ,WWT and Raptor Persecution are more grateful for the work you are carrying out ,you’re definitely doing a lot of the heavy lifting for them.

 

[Ruger#1]

What is the record thread length? Surely 26 pages is a contender?

A good indication of strength of feeling in response to the inadequacies highlighted in the thread’s title.
Ironic that a thread discussing the poor performance of the shooting organisations should be high jacked by the most guilty of the organisations to demonstrate their acceptance of lead shot legislation and post yet more inconclusive studies irrelevant to the use of lead shot inland in the UK.

 

[Ruger#1]

An huge own goal by the Shooting Organizations - the lead farce

This is the title of this thread and I don't believe Connor is getting the point.
As I have said previous in previous threads 20 years ago all my shooting Friends were members of BASC and now none of them are members and are all still Shooting this is mainly because they have been misrepresented and they are not happy with the way BASC has conducting themselves.
I believe a lead ban will be another nail in the coffin of a ban on shooting sports across the country and I believe alot of BASC members will not know much about what is going on until it happens as most of them obviously throw the BASC magazine straight into the recycling bin without reading any information that they are trying to pedal.
All the anti shooting organizations must be laughing their socks off as a shooting organisations is doing their work for them.

Pleased to hear it ,myself a member for over 40 years and still am. This year I’ll move over to supporter membership of my wildfowling club and by doing so evade BASC membership. I think there will be an exodus of members due to the handling of the lead shot issue , I certainly hope so unfortunately they deserve it. I may return if the views expressed on forums change and/or there is a change away from representatives that are almost Chris Packham in outlook ,although in fairness he at least represents the cause he is fighting for so maybe not such a good comparison.