Basc voluntary lead ban

[Odders]

Can someone supply a link to where these multiple organisations have laid out the alternatives to lead that aren't excessively expensive, are suitable for many treasured & very expensive older shotguns & don't leave far more birds wounded like steel?
Oh & the bit where they've worked with cartridge makers to come up with a ready for production. alternative to plastic for cartridge cases that's waterproof & doesn't swell in high humidity, like when wildfowling in a marsh, in the rain?

I'm sure it must be there somewhere & I'm just not looking in the right place...

 

[Apthorpe]

Why not simply ask commercial shoots to certify they operate 'lead - free' or they will go down the pan ?

Well, everyone knows they'll ignore it. When we read that a high proportion of mallard on the market tested haven't been shot with legal methods, where does anybody think those mallard came from? Yes. Almost certainly, commercial shoots doing those distasteful fish-in-a-barrel duck drives to get the numbers up.

 

[kes]

Well, everyone knows they'll ignore it. When we read that a high proportion of mallard on the market tested haven't been shot with legal methods, where does anybody think those mallard came from? Yes. Almost certainly, commercial shoots doing those distasteful fish-in-a-barrel duck drives to get the numbers up.

When you compare enforced self certification (pass out the cartridges with the peg nos and charge as part of the day) - Red Tractor 'type' - to everyone having to cope without lead, then it begins to make sense. If this is really about commercial shoots !

 

[Apthorpe]

When you compare enforced self certification (pass out the cartridges with the peg nos and charge as part of the day) - Red Tractor 'type' - to everyone having to cope without lead, then it begins to make sense. If this is really about commercial shoots !

It isn't about commercial shoots. It is and always has been about banning shooting. For our shooting organisations to take steps voluntarily on the path to banning all shooting for absolutely no good reason is beyond demented.

 

[stubear]

Stubear, I’ve been meaning to a ask you for a while now.....is it “Stu-bear” or “Stub-ear” ? I just want to make sure I’m pronouncing it right in my head.

I leave that one up to the philosophers!

Joking aside its Stu-bear. When I was at school we studied AA Milne and a mate of mine thought it was hilarious to call me Winnie the Stu (because thats the sort of thing that is funny when you're 14) and it stuck, then got shortened to Stubear. Its been my forum handle for years now!

 

[dollman]

The scientific studies say its not brilliant idea to consume lead, the supermarkets & public understand that message. In the next few years there will be no commercial market for lead shot birds which appears to be the main driver behind the joint announcement.

Well just stop using lead shot being used on game food going into the public food chain then , if your eating the game yourself use what ever and pest control like crows magpies etc use what you what not try and ban the lot , isn’t that a far better option

 

[stubear]

And sorry, to add my thoughts on this one.

I have been thinking about this a lot over the last couple of days and, whilst my initial reaction was one of outrage, in reality I suspect this will largely be a non-issue ASSUMING things dont progress to a silly state.

So we are being recommended to use non toxic shot on game - wildfowlers have been doing that for years. So far as I can see it the only really issues are these;

1) Some older guns cant shoot steel shot but you can use bismuth, albeit at higher cost for the moment - longer term costs will come down.
2) This is a potential doorway to a ban lead at clay shoots which really would be an issue because a lot of grounds dont allow plastic wads.
3) Its a potential doorway to a ban on lead in rifles for game (which lets face it is probably not too far down the line) which isnt a problem per se for stalking, but is an issue when it comes to practicing on ranges because Bisley and MOD ranges dont allow monolithic bullets due to the ricochet risk.

We can still use lead at clay shoots, we can still use lead on rifle ranges and for deer stalking (for now at least). If we start down the route of "ok now you cant use lead on ranges, you cant use it here, you cant do XYZ, you can only shoot when the moon is waxing blah blah.." then thats another story.

What I do think the organisations have completely mishandled is the communications out to the wider shooting community. Given the regular attack we're under from WJ, the OWB, the GL fiasco and so on in the last few years it was always going to go down like a cup of cold sick to just hit us all with a joint decision from all of our orgs (who ultimately work for us) like this.

That said, I do also sympathise for how else this could have been handled. If they'd consulted us the answer would have most likely come back as a resounding "NO!" and then if they'd pushed ahead anyway then what? Plus that would have been ammo for the antis who could have said "see, the shooting orgs are trying to act in the best interests of the environment but the shooters are all married to lead - time for a government lead ban", and that would have come with loads of negative PR.

Its a really tough one.

The positives here though are big;
1) We get a lot of good PR for being eco friendly.
2) The shooting orgs all worked together for a common goal. Imagine that?!
3) It staves off a potential enforced ban which lets face it would have happened, and certainly wouldnt have given us 5 years to think about it. The gubmnent would have used that as another tool to gun grab no doubt....
4) This will push ammo makers to pursue decent eco friendly options and bring the price down of non toxic ammo.
5) This will also start to push range owners to consider allowing non toxic shot, eco wads, monolithic bullets and the like.

JMHO and all that.

Honestly I think I might pick up a box of non toxic rifle ammo next time I go to the shop and see how it shoots, and some non toxic shotty ammo.

 

[reloader54]

just wait 'til those sometimes spoke of feo,s start making up conditions concerning which ammo they want conditioned on your ticket.

 

[CarlW]

And sorry, to add my thoughts on this one.

I have been thinking about this a lot over the last couple of days and, whilst my initial reaction was one of outrage, in reality I suspect this will largely be a non-issue ASSUMING things dont progress to a silly state.

So we are being recommended to use non toxic shot on game - wildfowlers have been doing that for years. So far as I can see it the only really issues are these;

1) Some older guns cant shoot steel shot but you can use bismuth, albeit at higher cost for the moment - longer term costs will come down.
2) This is a potential doorway to a ban lead at clay shoots which really would be an issue because a lot of grounds dont allow plastic wads.
3) Its a potential doorway to a ban on lead in rifles for game (which lets face it is probably not too far down the line) which isnt a problem per se for stalking, but is an issue when it comes to practicing on ranges because Bisley and MOD ranges dont allow monolithic bullets due to the ricochet risk.

We can still use lead at clay shoots, we can still use lead on rifle ranges and for deer stalking (for now at least). If we start down the route of "ok now you cant use lead on ranges, you cant use it here, you cant do XYZ, you can only shoot when the moon is waxing blah blah.." then thats another story.

What I do think the organisations have completely mishandled is the communications out to the wider shooting community. Given the regular attack we're under from WJ, the OWB, the GL fiasco and so on in the last few years it was always going to go down like a cup of cold sick to just hit us all with a joint decision from all of our orgs (who ultimately work for us) like this.

That said, I do also sympathise for how else this could have been handled. If they'd consulted us the answer would have most likely come back as a resounding "NO!" and then if they'd pushed ahead anyway then what? Plus that would have been ammo for the antis who could have said "see, the shooting orgs are trying to act in the best interests of the environment but the shooters are all married to lead - time for a government lead ban", and that would have come with loads of negative PR.

Its a really tough one.

The positives here though are big;
1) We get a lot of good PR for being eco friendly.
2) The shooting orgs all worked together for a common goal. Imagine that?!
3) It staves off a potential enforced ban which lets face it would have happened, and certainly wouldnt have given us 5 years to think about it. The gubmnent would have used that as another tool to gun grab no doubt....
4) This will push ammo makers to pursue decent eco friendly options and bring the price down of non toxic ammo.
5) This will also start to push range owners to consider allowing non toxic shot, eco wads, monolithic bullets and the like.

JMHO and all that.

Honestly I think I might pick up a box of non toxic rifle ammo next time I go to the shop and see how it shoots, and some non toxic shotty ammo.

Stop being reasonable, Stu. I'm still too angry to post on this issue. I think I might have a f'kin stroke if I start typing...

 

[reloader54]

Stop being reasonable, Stu. I'm still too angry to post on this issue. I think I might have a f'kin stroke if I start typing...

get yerself over to introductions Carl,, you'll still want to "have a stroke" but you wont be angry any more.

 

[CarlW]

get yerself over to introductions Carl,, you'll still want to "have a stroke" but you wont be angry any more.

This one...? With the lady...?

Keen Stalker ideally wanting to get into professional stalking

Based in Wiltshire, just done my DSC1. FEO still finding issues to grant me the variation to get a .243 I have been looking at but hope that I will get that soon. Anyone have any good advice as to how to get into it - I am willing to work almost anywhere? I'm also thinking of working as a...

www.thestalkingdirectory.co.uk

 

[reloader54]

This one...? With the lady...?

Keen Stalker ideally wanting to get into professional stalking

Based in Wiltshire, just done my DSC1. FEO still finding issues to grant me the variation to get a .243 I have been looking at but hope that I will get that soon. Anyone have any good advice as to how to get into it - I am willing to work almost anywhere? I'm also thinking of working as a...

www.thestalkingdirectory.co.uk

yes I think its a new rule,, you cant join without a nice photo.

 

[Big_Sparky]

yes I think its a new rule,, you cant join without a nice photo.

Possibly your most sensible post to date

 

[dollman]

Well just stop using lead shot being used on game food going into the public food chain then , if your eating the game yourself use what ever and pest control like crows magpies etc use what you want , not try and ban the lot , isn’t that a far better option

 

[stubear]

Stop being reasonable, Stu. I'm still too angry to post on this issue. I think I might have a f'kin stroke if I start typing...

Dont get me wrong mate, its a ban - Or a proposed ban, or voluntary ban or whatever. I'm not in favour of yet more restrictions on any shooting activity in the UK (and am in favour of loosening a number off TBH) but this sort of thing does have the potential to reflect well on us and frankly we could use the PR at the moment.

Not using lead shot is something Joe Blow in the street can easily understand, its something we can work around without too much adverse impact and it hopefully will deflect some of the aggro we're getting because we can now say "leave us alone - as you can see we're already keeping our own house in order."

Its not ideal, not by a long shot (you know, the sort of long shots you cant make with steel because its not heavy enough ) but it might give us some breathing space. If you're already addressing the issues that the public dont like it makes it rather hard for Fatty, Batty and ****ty to chuck rocks without looking silly themselves!

 

[Apthorpe]

And sorry, to add my thoughts on this one.

I have been thinking about this a lot over the last couple of days and, whilst my initial reaction was one of outrage, in reality I suspect this will largely be a non-issue ASSUMING things dont progress to a silly state.

So we are being recommended to use non toxic shot on game - wildfowlers have been doing that for years. So far as I can see it the only really issues are these;

1) Some older guns cant shoot steel shot but you can use bismuth, albeit at higher cost for the moment - longer term costs will come down.
2) This is a potential doorway to a ban lead at clay shoots which really would be an issue because a lot of grounds dont allow plastic wads.
3) Its a potential doorway to a ban on lead in rifles for game (which lets face it is probably not too far down the line) which isnt a problem per se for stalking, but is an issue when it comes to practicing on ranges because Bisley and MOD ranges dont allow monolithic bullets due to the ricochet risk.

We can still use lead at clay shoots, we can still use lead on rifle ranges and for deer stalking (for now at least). If we start down the route of "ok now you cant use lead on ranges, you cant use it here, you cant do XYZ, you can only shoot when the moon is waxing blah blah.." then thats another story.

What I do think the organisations have completely mishandled is the communications out to the wider shooting community. Given the regular attack we're under from WJ, the OWB, the GL fiasco and so on in the last few years it was always going to go down like a cup of cold sick to just hit us all with a joint decision from all of our orgs (who ultimately work for us) like this.

That said, I do also sympathise for how else this could have been handled. If they'd consulted us the answer would have most likely come back as a resounding "NO!" and then if they'd pushed ahead anyway then what? Plus that would have been ammo for the antis who could have said "see, the shooting orgs are trying to act in the best interests of the environment but the shooters are all married to lead - time for a government lead ban", and that would have come with loads of negative PR.

Its a really tough one.

The positives here though are big;
1) We get a lot of good PR for being eco friendly.
2) The shooting orgs all worked together for a common goal. Imagine that?!
3) It staves off a potential enforced ban which lets face it would have happened, and certainly wouldnt have given us 5 years to think about it. The gubmnent would have used that as another tool to gun grab no doubt....
4) This will push ammo makers to pursue decent eco friendly options and bring the price down of non toxic ammo.
5) This will also start to push range owners to consider allowing non toxic shot, eco wads, monolithic bullets and the like.

JMHO and all that.

Honestly I think I might pick up a box of non toxic rifle ammo next time I go to the shop and see how it shoots, and some non toxic shotty ammo.

Good post. However:

1. Bismuth is not known to be safe, and like other heavy metals is toxic and bioaccumulates.
2. Alternatives to lead will not get any cheaper. They are likely to get more expensive because A) they did when the US went lead free, and B) the price is determined by the cost of scarce raw materials, and is not liable to be reduced by manufacturing efficiencies or new mines. Bismuth is rare. Tungsten is rare. New materials are improbable because of the lack of suitably dense and abundant elements.
3. It's a wide open doorway to a ban on lead rifle ammo. To the limited extent that lead shot game has been proven to be harmful to eat, that has been for venison shot with lead bullets. It's impossible to argue that you accept lead shotgun ammo is a no-no, but rifle ammo is safe. Lead bullets will be gone in short order after.

On the plus side:
1. We will get no positive PR.
2. It's ironic that they united for a common purpose of screwing their members.
3. It doesn't stave anything off. It merely allows the orgs to assume credit for screwing us because of ....er....no evidence...and no need.
4. No chance. This misunderstands the situation. See above.

 

[limulus]

Joins LIARS...it’s the future..

 

[Island]

And sorry, to add my thoughts on this one.

I have been thinking about this a lot over the last couple of days and, whilst my initial reaction was one of outrage, in reality I suspect this will largely be a non-issue ASSUMING things dont progress to a silly state.

So we are being recommended to use non toxic shot on game - wildfowlers have been doing that for years. So far as I can see it the only really issues are these;

1) Some older guns cant shoot steel shot but you can use bismuth, albeit at higher cost for the moment - longer term costs will come down.
2) This is a potential doorway to a ban lead at clay shoots which really would be an issue because a lot of grounds dont allow plastic wads.
3) Its a potential doorway to a ban on lead in rifles for game (which lets face it is probably not too far down the line) which isnt a problem per se for stalking, but is an issue when it comes to practicing on ranges because Bisley and MOD ranges dont allow monolithic bullets due to the ricochet risk.

We can still use lead at clay shoots, we can still use lead on rifle ranges and for deer stalking (for now at least). If we start down the route of "ok now you cant use lead on ranges, you cant use it here, you cant do XYZ, you can only shoot when the moon is waxing blah blah.." then thats another story.

What I do think the organisations have completely mishandled is the communications out to the wider shooting community. Given the regular attack we're under from WJ, the OWB, the GL fiasco and so on in the last few years it was always going to go down like a cup of cold sick to just hit us all with a joint decision from all of our orgs (who ultimately work for us) like this.

That said, I do also sympathise for how else this could have been handled. If they'd consulted us the answer would have most likely come back as a resounding "NO!" and then if they'd pushed ahead anyway then what? Plus that would have been ammo for the antis who could have said "see, the shooting orgs are trying to act in the best interests of the environment but the shooters are all married to lead - time for a government lead ban", and that would have come with loads of negative PR.

Its a really tough one.

The positives here though are big;
1) We get a lot of good PR for being eco friendly.
2) The shooting orgs all worked together for a common goal. Imagine that?!
3) It staves off a potential enforced ban which lets face it would have happened, and certainly wouldnt have given us 5 years to think about it. The gubmnent would have used that as another tool to gun grab no doubt....
4) This will push ammo makers to pursue decent eco friendly options and bring the price down of non toxic ammo.
5) This will also start to push range owners to consider allowing non toxic shot, eco wads, monolithic bullets and the like.

JMHO and all that.

Honestly I think I might pick up a box of non toxic rifle ammo next time I go to the shop and see how it shoots, and some non toxic shotty ammo.

Steady on chap. If you keep being sensible then people will have nothing to get indignant about.

No doubt the usual suspects will be along shortly to call you a BASC apologist for not subscribing to their outrage.....

 

[Ade8mm]

And sorry, to add my thoughts on this one.

I have been thinking about this a lot over the last couple of days and, whilst my initial reaction was one of outrage, in reality I suspect this will largely be a non-issue ASSUMING things dont progress to a silly state.

So we are being recommended to use non toxic shot on game - wildfowlers have been doing that for years. So far as I can see it the only really issues are these;

1) Some older guns cant shoot steel shot but you can use bismuth, albeit at higher cost for the moment - longer term costs will come down.
2) This is a potential doorway to a ban lead at clay shoots which really would be an issue because a lot of grounds dont allow plastic wads.
3) Its a potential doorway to a ban on lead in rifles for game (which lets face it is probably not too far down the line) which isnt a problem per se for stalking, but is an issue when it comes to practicing on ranges because Bisley and MOD ranges dont allow monolithic bullets due to the ricochet risk.

We can still use lead at clay shoots, we can still use lead on rifle ranges and for deer stalking (for now at least). If we start down the route of "ok now you cant use lead on ranges, you cant use it here, you cant do XYZ, you can only shoot when the moon is waxing blah blah.." then thats another story.

What I do think the organisations have completely mishandled is the communications out to the wider shooting community. Given the regular attack we're under from WJ, the OWB, the GL fiasco and so on in the last few years it was always going to go down like a cup of cold sick to just hit us all with a joint decision from all of our orgs (who ultimately work for us) like this.

That said, I do also sympathise for how else this could have been handled. If they'd consulted us the answer would have most likely come back as a resounding "NO!" and then if they'd pushed ahead anyway then what? Plus that would have been ammo for the antis who could have said "see, the shooting orgs are trying to act in the best interests of the environment but the shooters are all married to lead - time for a government lead ban", and that would have come with loads of negative PR.

Its a really tough one.

The positives here though are big;
1) We get a lot of good PR for being eco friendly.
2) The shooting orgs all worked together for a common goal. Imagine that?!
3) It staves off a potential enforced ban which lets face it would have happened, and certainly wouldnt have given us 5 years to think about it. The gubmnent would have used that as another tool to gun grab no doubt....
4) This will push ammo makers to pursue decent eco friendly options and bring the price down of non toxic ammo.
5) This will also start to push range owners to consider allowing non toxic shot, eco wads, monolithic bullets and the like.

JMHO and all that.

Honestly I think I might pick up a box of non toxic rifle ammo next time I go to the shop and see how it shoots, and some non toxic shotty ammo.

I generally agree with your sentiments but;

"That said, I do also sympathise for how else this could have been handled. If they'd consulted us the answer would have most likely come back as a resounding "NO!" and then if they'd pushed ahead anyway then what? Plus that would have been ammo for the antis who could have said "see, the shooting orgs are trying to act in the best interests of the environment but the shooters are all married to lead - time for a government lead ban", and that would have come with loads of negative PR."

Had the organisations been evidentially more pro-active, historically, on other issues, they would have most likely enjoyed the benefit of more support on this which in fact may well have resulted in something other than a resounding NO (in your hypothetical consultation ). So in so far as that is concerned I feel they have missed the not only the plot, but also a great opportunity. I fear that will cost them dearly ( £££/ members).

(And for the record @Island this is not calling Stubear a "basc apologist" )

 

[CarlW]

Steady on chap. If you keep being sensible then people will have nothing to get indignant about.

No doubt the usual suspects will be along shortly to call you a BASC apologist for not subscribing to their outrage.....

Nought wrong with outrage. Personally, I'm swimming in the stuff right now...