BASC survey - voluntary transition away from lead shot for live quarry shooting

[CookM]

Done.

 

[Heym SR20]

Everyone else seems to be fine with it maybe they've come to their senses finally and realised that certainly for rifles, it ain't really a problem. I wonder how many birds choke on big flakes of copper or the petals when they split, or how many suffer from internal bleeding because it's cut right through their intestines when they've swallowed it... There you go, copper ain't safe for them either, get that banned too

Except the vast majority of copper bullets will exit full intact. Whereas a lead bullet will leave a significant proportion of lead inside the carcass, mostly as fine particles. It will be in the meat and in all the gralloch.

The one good thing that the voluntary transition has done is give the ammunition industry a huge kick up the backside. We are seeing lots of innovation.

Modern monolithic copper bullets work very well in most rifles. Certainly in my 223, 243 and 7mm I am not going back to lead ammo. No need to. They kill well, and minimal meat damage.

I have been using steel in shotguns on the foreshore fir last 20 odd years. I now use it for all game and in 12, 16 and 20 bores in 2 1/2” cartridges in guns built in the 1920’s. Yesterday I had 4 ducks, a pheasant, a jay and a large dog fox all dead on the spot.

12 and 20, there are lots of good non lead solutions suitable for standard nitro proof guns. If you are using a 2 3/4” chamber lots of options, older 2 1/2” fewer options. Cost of all cartridges are bloody horrible, but they are still cheapest part of any shooting day.

There are high speed, high pressure steel for Steel Proofed guns. I use these through a 3” Franchi on the foreshore where ranges are a bit longer. They are expensive.

The only gun I don’t use on game is my 2 1/2” 410 as I have yet to get hold of non toxic ammo. But I expect solutions will be available in not too distant future.

 

[Conor O'Gorman]

Conor as a ( basc member ) it's very naive to believe that this ( forced transition )
will not affect rifle ammunition or will that be
phase 2 ?

BASC is opposed to any restrictions for lead rifle ammunition for live quarry shooting.

 

[Conor O'Gorman]

Why does the voluntary transition not equally apply to rifle shooting.

When stalking deer, grallochs are usually left in the field and they then eaten by a whole host of birds and animals. With lead rifle bullets there are a huge number of lead fragment left in the carcass, many of which are very small and thus easily bioavailable to any animal or bird that eats them.

I cannot understand why the BASC has changed their position on this when there is a large body of evidence that shows the damage of lead shot animal remains can cause to other wild creatures. Admittedly most is from USA and mainland Europe but last time I looked a golden eagle in Scotland works pretty much like any other raptor in any other part of the world. And lead bullet causing lead fragments in an elk or white tail will do the same on a red deer or roe deer.

BASC has not changed its position on the use of lead rifle ammunition - the voluntary transition announced in February 2020 was for lead shot for live quarry shooting, not lead rifle ammunition, and we are opposed to any restrictions for lead rifle ammunition for live quarry shooting and the reasons are outlined in detail in our consultation response.

BASC response to HSE lead ammunition consultation

Read BASC's response to the Health and Safety Executive's socio-economic consultation on proposals to restrict the use of lead ammunition.

basc.org.uk

 

[Conor O'Gorman]

Except it’s not really consultation if the outcome is predetermined and those consulted have no real opportunity to change the outcome with counter-proposals - communication, possibly but not consultation. I accept that lead is a toxin and an alternative would be better but the attention has been on stopping the use of lead with little concern for the effect on shooting and its stakeholders. We are expected to get with the programme and cope - which we will. I understand the position that BASC took but not with how it prosecuted it and hence are no longer a member. I suspect the motive was to maintain whatever influence BASC thinks it had with civil servants, who would otherwise have stopped talking to them, if they had opposed or been seen to be difficult. The circle that influences government policy is often very small and disproportionate in its influence. Less time spent on being an apologist for flawed policy and more time on credible alternatives would be an improvement. And that goes for influencing Home Office Guidence as well.

Thanks, I am interested in your counter-proposal - whether here or by PM if you prefer.

 

[Heym SR20]

BASC has not changed its position on the use of lead rifle ammunition - the voluntary transition announced in February 2020 was for lead shot for live quarry shooting, not lead rifle ammunition, and we are opposed to any restrictions for lead rifle ammunition for live quarry shooting and the reasons are outlined in detail in our consultation response.

BASC response to HSE lead ammunition consultation

Read BASC's response to the Health and Safety Executive's socio-economic consultation on proposals to restrict the use of lead ammunition.

basc.org.uk

It really does not make any sense that BASC has two opposing views when from nature’s point of view there is no difference consuming lead pellets or lead fragments from a rifle bullet.

As a BASC member I am disappointed in the BASC’s response on lead rifle bullets continuing to be used in the shooting of animals, when in other responses you say there is clear evidence that lead shot is harmful to wildlife.

 

[Bowland blades]

it messed me about after filling it in , kept asking me to fill in stuff i already had answered . Gave up 3rd try .

 

[Apthorpe]

It really does not make any sense that BASC has two opposing views when from nature’s point of view there is no difference consuming lead pellets or lead fragments from a rifle bullet.

As a BASC member I am disappointed in the BASC’s response on lead rifle bullets continuing to be used in the shooting of animals, when in other responses you say there is clear evidence that lead shot is harmful to wildlife.

Why does there need to be compulsion to force people to conform to a minority view as to what type of ammunition to use, given the fact that there is not a good scientific basis supporting the change? The existence of a bunch of studies of often dubious quality does not equate to being able to make a sound scientific conclusion. Everyone has been through this until they're blue in that fave and there simply is not good reason for this, however much you insist that bad science is fact.

 

[Heym SR20]

Why does there need to be compulsion to force people to conform to a minority view as to what type of ammunition to use, given the fact that there is not a good scientific basis supporting the change? The existence of a bunch of studies of often dubious quality does not equate to being able to make a sound scientific conclusion. Everyone has been through this until they're blue in that fave and there simply is not good reason for this, however much you insist that bad science is fact.

I think we will just have to agree to disagree. I think there is plenty of good science that supports that presence of lead in any quantity within a human, animal or bird’s blood and tissues is pretty poor for their long term health.

As for compulsion - its the same argument as removing lead from paint, petrol and many other products such as white and red lead that were commonly used around the house, in construction or boat building, or use of asbestos or many chemicals used in agriculture.

FFS even the makers of ammunition containing lead put warnings on the packaging about the dangers of exposure to lead.

 

[palmer_mike]

I think we will just have to agree to disagree. I think there is plenty of good science that supports that presence of lead in any quantity within a human, animal or bird’s blood and tissues is pretty poor for their long term health.

Good reason to ban smoking cigars then?

 

[Smellydog]

FFS even the makers of ammunition containing lead put warnings on the packaging about the dangers of exposure to lead.

Them making the ammo seem ok though don't they .
Lead in the forms required as anti knock additive in fuel and paint are not lead metal and are thus very toxic as they can easily pass into the blood stream.
Lead in metal form, even tiny is quite inert. In fact I say more inert than a piece of copper or steel!

 

[Smellydog]

The real reason basic are not opposed to lead rifle ammo is because the hooray Henries aren't really into all that!
It's about retaining the status quo for the city bankers and well to does on their jolly pheasant slaughter days. They can afford using expensive ammunition.

 

[Smellydog]

think we will just have to agree to disagree. I think there is plenty of good science that supports that presence of lead in any quantity within a human, animal or bird’s blood and tissues is pretty poor for their long term health.

Dam right.

There are bore holes for water here. Next to an ex clay shoot. No lead in the water! And it comes through lead pipes! Wildlife is thriving on the ex shoot ground.

 

[tarponhead]

Thanks, I am interested in your counter-proposal - whether here or by PM if you prefer.

Apologies for my late reply but counter- proposals would only make sense before the decision had been made. That said I appreciate that BASC has opposed lead bans for bullets, but as the alternatives work well, I would thought that it would have made more sense to wait for lead shot alternatives, before banning lead shot for which there are less options, to give manufacturers a chance to innovate and then scale production. That said, a deadline will no doubt drive innovation, but it could have been so much more collaborative an effort and less costly to the end user. What is sadly undoubted, is the toxicity of lead. However, the effect of it across the countryside is dwarfed by the much more generally toxic impact of poor sewage treatment and poor intensive farming practices on our flora fauna and rivers, which demands much more Govt attention than the law abiding shooting communities and their minority sports. I shoot deer, vermin, game birds and clays, fish (but not with lead), create sewage and eat fresh locally produced food, so I have lots of skin in the game! Will we see you at the Shooting Show?

 

[wildfowler.250]

As we enter the fifth year of the voluntary transition away from lead shot for live quarry shooting we would like to know your opinions. Have your views on lead, or the transition itself, changed in any way? We will ask you several questions about your shooting activities, your views on available ammunition, and any concerns you might still have regarding the transition or use of non-lead ammunition.

We are asking all active live quarry shooters to take part in our Lead Shot Transition Survey. Your views are important to us and will help shape our plans. The survey is annoymous, and your details will not be shared with anyone outside of the Association.

You have until midday on Wednesday 17 January to complete it.

Click the link below to start the survey.

Lead shot transition survey

If you have any queries regarding the survey please email surveys@basc.org.uk

Will fill it out. If you’re selling venison and that’s what the public want, then fine. But a blanket ban.. I see no need. I’ll be continuing to use lead for my own personal consumption. I’ve been using steel shot for wildfowl for years but primarily as it’s a legal requirement.

If banning lead is an attempt to get more venison onto plates, it’s the costs to the public that they care about more than anything and it’s hardly cheap off the shelf,(not saying it should be). But banning lead wouldn’t be the magic solution.

 

[Conor O'Gorman]

Apologies for my late reply but counter- proposals would only make sense before the decision had been made. That said I appreciate that BASC has opposed lead bans for bullets, but as the alternatives work well, I would thought that it would have made more sense to wait for lead shot alternatives, before banning lead shot for which there are less options, to give manufacturers a chance to innovate and then scale production. That said, a deadline will no doubt drive innovation, but it could have been so much more collaborative an effort and less costly to the end user. What is sadly undoubted, is the toxicity of lead. However, the effect of it across the countryside is dwarfed by the much more generally toxic impact of poor sewage treatment and poor intensive farming practices on our flora fauna and rivers, which demands much more Govt attention than the law abiding shooting communities and their minority sports. I shoot deer, vermin, game birds and clays, fish (but not with lead), create sewage and eat fresh locally produced food, so I have lots of skin in the game! Will we see you at the Shooting Show?

Thanks, BASC has opposed all the HSE proposal in its consultation response, which considered the impacts on every shooting discipline, both live quarry and target.

We critiqued every assertion presented by the HSE on the exposure risks from lead ammunition in its consultation documents and in most cases found the evidence to be either inconclusive or theoretical in nature. As a result, BASC found many of the restriction proposals to be over-precautionary.

We outlined the significant progress that was being made with the voluntary transition away from lead shot and single-use plastics in shotgun cartridges for live quarry shooting but outlined the various challenges that still needed to be addressed.

BASC detailed these challenges, including lack of lead alternatives for smaller shotgun gauges (20 bore and smaller) which account for 22.9% of cartridges used in live quarry shooting, a shortage of components such as powder, and a production bottleneck for steel shot.

As a result of the above (and much more) BASC called on the HSE to do the following:

• ensure that any proposals for live quarry shooting with lead shot have realistic time frames before any restrictions come into force.
• drop proposals to ban the sale of lead shot for target shooting as a means of enforcing restrictions on the use of lead shot for live quarry shooting because this is mission creep and outside the scope of the HSE review.
• ensure that an independent body is appointed to review the supply of lead shot cartridges before any restrictions come into force.
• drop the proposed restrictions on “approved clay grounds” where appropriate risks management measures are in place.
• not propose any restrictions for lead rifle ammunition for live quarry shooting.
• implement a buy-back scheme.

You can download our consultation response here:

BASC response to HSE lead ammunition consultation

Read BASC's response to the Health and Safety Executive's socio-economic consultation on proposals to restrict the use of lead ammunition.

basc.org.uk

BASC will be at the Shooting Show.

 

[Conor O'Gorman]

Will fill it out. If you’re selling venison and that’s what the public want, then fine. But a blanket ban.. I see no need. I’ll be continuing to use lead for my own personal consumption. I’ve been using steel shot for wildfowl for years but primarily as it’s a legal requirement.

If banning lead is an attempt to get more venison onto plates, it’s the costs to the public that they care about more than anything and it’s hardly cheap off the shelf,(not saying it should be). But banning lead wouldn’t be the magic solution.

Thanks, the survey ended last month. In summary, the HSE is considering recommendations to the govt to ban various outdoor uses of lead ammunition and BASC is opposed to that.

 

[HallyButt]

It really does not make any sense that BASC has two opposing views when from nature’s point of view there is no difference consuming lead pellets or lead fragments from a rifle bullet.

As a BASC member I am disappointed in the BASC’s response on lead rifle bullets continuing to be used in the shooting of animals, when in other responses you say there is clear evidence that lead shot is harmful to wildlife.

I completely agree, they are all over the shop, lead us either harmless, or it’s not

 

[wildfowler.250]

Thanks, the survey ended last month. In summary, the HSE is considering recommendations to the govt to ban various outdoor uses of lead ammunition and BASC is opposed to that.

Thanks! Did realise that,(a little too late). Thought it was the 17th of this month. Appreciate the update!

 

[Conor O'Gorman]

I completely agree, they are all over the shop, lead us either harmless, or it’s not

The issue is about risks that can be controlled and those that cannot. With that in mind the key issue is lead shot fired in the open countryside - that risk (which is for birds picking up lead shot as grit) is being targeted through the voluntary transition away from lead shot for live quarry shooting. The restriction proposals for GB and EU are broad brush and do not target the risk and are being opposed. There are two extremes to the debate - those that believe there are no evidenced risks from lead ammunition and no need to change what we do at all - and those that want a full ban on all lead ammunition as soon as possible regardless of the impact on shooting and conservation. BASC and the other shooting organisations are being pragmatic and advocating an evidence-based and proportionate outcome. That is a summary of a complex issue and can be best understood by reading BASC's response to the HSE consultation which can be downloaded here:

BASC response to HSE lead ammunition consultation

Read BASC's response to the Health and Safety Executive's socio-economic consultation on proposals to restrict the use of lead ammunition.

basc.org.uk