HSE Lead restriction extension

[timbrayford]

Besides certain grounds with crazy ricochet risks, verging on or over the dodgy side with lead i see no reason why not ?. Remember steel looses velocity faster than lead , so some grounds could actually increase their total number of stands
I have shot a lot of steel at clays

Perhaps I should have been more specific, i.e. lowland game shooting as opposed to wildfowling.

Under the controlled environment of a clay ground where there are no beaters/stops/ pickers up and gunline to worry about and a presumably safe background that mitigates (hopefully) the ricochet risk, and both with wildfowling and clay shooting you are using a significantly heavier shotgun to help absorb the additional recoil.

If I was so inclined to shoot with steel under those circumstances I'd use a cheap Turkish gun like a Yildiz or Hatsan so if I had the unfortunate experience of a ring bulge 10" forward of the breech , which I've seen on someone else's Miroku at least you can chuck the barrels away and replace without too much expense.

I'd guess that as most shotgun cartridges by volume are made for clay shooting the lack of support of orgs like the CPSA & IOC for lead alternatives is probably putting a brake on their development?

 

[timbrayford]

So pick another one, you’re going to need it.

Bismuth when BASC and the like have finished toadying up to Packham and his Eco-Warrior chums!

 

[Bowland blades]

Perhaps I should have been more specific, i.e. lowland game shooting as opposed to wildfowling.

Under the controlled environment of a clay ground where there are no beaters/stops/ pickers up and gunline to worry about and a presumably safe background that mitigates (hopefully) the ricochet risk, and both with wildfowling and clay shooting you are using a significantly heavier shotgun to help absorb the additional recoil.

If I was so inclined to shoot with steel under those circumstances I'd use a cheap Turkish gun like a Yildiz or Hatsan so if I had the unfortunate experience of a ring bulge 10" forward of the breech , which I've seen on someone else's Miroku at least you can chuck the barrels away and replace without too much expense.

I'd guess that as most shotgun cartridges by volume are made for clay shooting the lack of support of orgs like the CPSA & IOC for lead alternatives is probably putting a brake on their development?

In truth std steel 28 gram can work very well indeed and has been my choice for Pheasant , rabbit , Hare etc . Like many i was a sceptic at first till one evening i took out the wrong box of shells ( those silly steel ones ) On a crow roost shoot . I had a good do telling myself how good lead was over steel ! In the morning after i got a shock as all the cases i picked up where the std performance steel ! Err , seriously i had to think different ( confidence is a big thing in good shotgun shooting ) . So i took a walk for a few Rabbits , to test further and i shot some far further out than i would with lead even - all where clean humane kills . Ever seen lead ball up on thick Fur ? Well i wanted to test that one ! I started taking steel on the Fox drives and when i had a guy guesting I usually carry a shotgun as a back up so that went steel again! I haven't bought any heavy lead shells at all
In my experience ( remembering that you dont seem to get fluke stray pellet kills with steel ) Steel is not as good as lead though, i honestly think its better so long as your on it and respect the fact there is an invisible wall with steel , the real far out shots hardly ever work with the one or two pellet strikes aint going to do the job

 

[Spear Chucker]

Bismuth when BASC and the like have finished toadying up to Packham and his Eco-Warrior chums!

Fully agree

 

[Conor O'Gorman]

@Conor O'Gorman

In essence the HSE is dedicating the necessary staff resource and time to properly go through the responses, many of which we know, from feedback received from members and on this forum and others, were well thought out and evidenced arguments against the remaining restriction proposals. That's a far cry from the way in which Natural Resources Wales handled the 40,000 responses to its consultation on banning the release of gamebirds.

As an accredited stakeholder with the HSE, BASC attends meetings of the HSE’s Independent Scientific Expert Panel as an observer. In November 2022 we raised our concerns in evidence to the Environment Audit Committee that in implementing UK REACH the HSE would be expected to follow the guidance of “Nemo judex in causa sua”, the principle of natural justice, in that that no person can judge a case of which they have an interest. And that it was therefore inappropriate that Professor Debbie Pain and Professor Rhys Green had been selected as members of the HSE’s Independent Scientific Expert Pool. This was because both individuals had been quoted in the media advocating a complete ban on lead ammunition, thereby demonstrating a clear bias and lack of independence for the task of independently reviewing the HSE’s restriction dossier and consultation responses pertaining to lead ammunition.

https://committees.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/113503/pdf/

 

[Liveonce]

In essence the HSE is dedicating the necessary staff resource and time to properly go through the responses, many of which we know, from feedback received from members and on this forum and others, were well thought out and evidenced arguments against the remaining restriction proposals. That's a far cry from the way in which Natural Resources Wales handled the 40,000 responses to its consultation on banning the release of gamebirds.

As an accredited stakeholder with the HSE, BASC attends meetings of the HSE’s Independent Scientific Expert Panel as an observer. In November 2022 we raised our concerns in evidence to the Environment Audit Committee that in implementing UK REACH the HSE would be expected to follow the guidance of “Nemo judex in causa sua”, the principle of natural justice, in that that no person can judge a case of which they have an interest. And that it was therefore inappropriate that Professor Debbie Pain and Professor Rhys Green had been selected as members of the HSE’s Independent Scientific Expert Pool. This was because both individuals had been quoted in the media advocating a complete ban on lead ammunition, thereby demonstrating a clear bias and lack of independence for the task of independently reviewing the HSE’s restriction dossier and consultation responses pertaining to lead ammunition.

https://committees.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/113503/pdf/

So November 2022, the HSE obviously listened to you? oh wait they are still shown in the list of HSE independent Scientific Expert Panel. Still guess it’s grounds for a JR when lead is banned.

 

[Bowland blades]

In essence the HSE is dedicating the necessary staff resource and time to properly go through the responses, many of which we know, from feedback received from members and on this forum and others, were well thought out and evidenced arguments against the remaining restriction proposals. That's a far cry from the way in which Natural Resources Wales handled the 40,000 responses to its consultation on banning the release of gamebirds.

As an accredited stakeholder with the HSE, BASC attends meetings of the HSE’s Independent Scientific Expert Panel as an observer. In November 2022 we raised our concerns in evidence to the Environment Audit Committee that in implementing UK REACH the HSE would be expected to follow the guidance of “Nemo judex in causa sua”, the principle of natural justice, in that that no person can judge a case of which they have an interest. And that it was therefore inappropriate that Professor Debbie Pain and Professor Rhys Green had been selected as members of the HSE’s Independent Scientific Expert Pool. This was because both individuals had been quoted in the media advocating a complete ban on lead ammunition, thereby demonstrating a clear bias and lack of independence for the task of independently reviewing the HSE’s restriction dossier and consultation responses pertaining to lead ammunition.

https://committees.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/113503/pdf/

So it was never going to be a fair fight then eh ? !

 

[Conor O'Gorman]

So November 2022, the HSE obviously listened to you? oh wait they are still shown in the list of HSE independent Scientific Expert Panel. Still guess it’s grounds for a JR when lead is banned.

So it was never going to be a fair fight then eh ? !

That shot across the bows by BASC and the evidence submitted by BASC and 2,758 other consultation responses (thanks again to any SD member amongst those circa 0.5% of certificate holders) to the 2022 HSE consultation made a difference. In 2023 HSE announced it had dropped its original proposals to ban lead airgun pellets for lack of conclusive evidence and conceded that target shooting with lead rifle ammunition should be allowed to continue at approved ranges. Those 2,759 responses were very few, but consider that for the same consultation a year previous in the EU, there were but a few hundred responses - and that from a hunting community circa 7 million. And few changes have been made to the lead restriction proposals in the EU. Here in the UK we are pushing back with some success. Now, let's see what happens next after the 8,159 responses to the 2023 HSE consultation. Thanks again to any SD members that were amongst the circa 1.3% of of certificate holders responding to that consultation.

 

[Spear Chucker]

That shot across the bows by BASC and the evidence submitted by BASC and 2,758 other consultation responses (thanks again to any SD member amongst those circa 0.5% of certificate holders) to the 2022 HSE consultation made a difference. In 2023 HSE announced it had dropped its original proposals to ban lead airgun pellets for lack of conclusive evidence and conceded that target shooting with lead rifle ammunition should be allowed to continue at approved ranges. Those 2,759 responses were very few, but consider that for the same consultation a year previous in the EU, there were but a few hundred responses - and that from a hunting community circa 7 million. And few changes have been made to the lead restriction proposals in the EU. Here in the UK we are pushing back with some success. Now, let's see what happens next after the 8,159 responses to the 2023 HSE consultation. Thanks again to any SD members that were amongst the circa 1.3% of of certificate holders responding to that consultation.

Thank you Conor, while I certainly appreciate your individual efforts, it is hard to have faith in an organisation that has committed to ending the use of lead shot in spite of the clear evidence that there is no need to do so. I feel BASC is just joining hands with other organisations like the CA who are all running scared from an uneducated mob. Collectively BASC and others are leading their membership up the ramp into the slaughterhouse. Ever since John Swift was in charge and his subsequent activities, BASC has been blighted with the suspicion that they may be working for the other side - whether wittingly or not. Time to change tack. I cancelled my membership and will re-join as soon as I think BASC has remembered what it is there for. I believe the clue was in the title. The British Association FOR shooting and Conservation. Most of your membership are not with you on lead. I will qualify that remark. Nearly all of the people I meet, who are (or profess to be) members of BASC in the beating line, in gun busses or elsewhere, are not taken in by the BASC story on lead. They are quiet because BASC allows no contradiction and no voice to dissenters. There is no proper debate -even if one were needed.
Time to tell your leaders to take their nasty pup and try to flog it to someone else. We are not buying it.

 

[Liveonce]

That shot across the bows by BASC and the evidence submitted by BASC and 2,758 other consultation responses (thanks again to any SD member amongst those circa 0.5% of certificate holders) to the 2022 HSE consultation made a difference. In 2023 HSE announced it had dropped its original proposals to ban lead airgun pellets for lack of conclusive evidence and conceded that target shooting with lead rifle ammunition should be allowed to continue at approved ranges. Those 2,759 responses were very few, but consider that for the same consultation a year previous in the EU, there were but a few hundred responses - and that from a hunting community circa 7 million. And few changes have been made to the lead restriction proposals in the EU. Here in the UK we are pushing back with some success. Now, let's see what happens next after the 8,159 responses to the 2023 HSE consultation. Thanks again to any SD members that were amongst the circa 1.3% of of certificate holders responding to that consultation.

Did not know the HSE consultations were a vote for or against lead, so why should the number of respondents change the outcome?

 

[White Spider]

Perhaps they should ban lead roofing first? This is ridiculous.

 

[Spear Chucker]

Perhaps they should ban lead roofing first? This is ridiculous.

If we get to that we need to see all lead flashing and roofing (churches etc) removed and soldering banned in construction.
Excerpt from a letter sent to my local MP, who sadly proved incapable of comprehending the information and just went quiet.

"In summary, metallic lead is a relatively inert metal, much more so than iron. To become a danger to the environment, fauna, flora and humans, metallic lead has to be turned into an organic / inorganic compound / ion. The same is true for iron.

Lead compounds can be highly dangerous, as can compounds of iron. Tetraethyl Lead, which was added as an anti-knocking agent to petrol for over 80 years and burned by the millions of tons (producing more harmful compounds) could kill you if it came into contact with your skin, yet metallic lead cannot be absorbed through your skin. Metallic iron cannot be absorbed through your skin yet Ferric Chloride (iron Chloride) can be absorbed and is highly dangerous, usually fatal.

Metallic lead is so inert that it is present, in billions of tons , on the vast majority of buildings in the UK, it is exposed to the erosive effects of wind, rain and sunshine as well as abrasion yet is not considered a danger. However metallic lead in relatively small amounts present in the sand traps of rifle shooting ranges exposed to the same forces, is considered so dangerous by HSE (without scientific comparison or explanation) that it is proposed it must be removed from those sand traps on a regular basis because of the dangers to human and animal life as well as the environment.

Acids do not react easily with metallic lead. Hydrochloric acid, present in our digestive system, does not dissolve metallic lead easily if at all, nor does metallic lead react with blood or plasma, as shown by bullets and pellets left in victims, as surgery is viewed as sometimes more harmful to remove those objects. There are still veterans of WW2 , the Korean war, Vietnamese and Northern Irish conflicts carrying metallic lead "souvenirs" - some for more than 80 years with no reported ill effects."

 

[Conor O'Gorman]

Thank you Conor, while I certainly appreciate your individual efforts, it is hard to have faith in an organisation that has committed to ending the use of lead shot in spite of the clear evidence that there is no need to do so. I feel BASC is just joining hands with other organisations like the CA who are all running scared from an uneducated mob. Collectively BASC and others are leading their membership up the ramp into the slaughterhouse. Ever since John Swift was in charge and his subsequent activities, BASC has been blighted with the suspicion that they may be working for the other side - whether wittingly or not. Time to change tack. I cancelled my membership and will re-join as soon as I think BASC has remembered what it is there for. I believe the clue was in the title. The British Association FOR shooting and Conservation. Most of your membership are not with you on lead. I will qualify that remark. Nearly all of the people I meet, who are (or profess to be) members of BASC in the beating line, in gun busses or elsewhere, are not taken in by the BASC story on lead. They are quiet because BASC allows no contradiction and no voice to dissenters. There is no proper debate -even if one were needed.
Time to tell your leaders to take their nasty pup and try to flog it to someone else. We are not buying it.

Fair enough, that is your view and those you know and there has been a tsunami of misinformation online over the years on lead. The truth will come to the surface in time and perhaps in time we will all wonder what all the fuss was about all those years ago. As regards BASC, as someone working on lead and many other policy issues for 15 years I just see colleagues working all hours for shooting and conservation. The key issue with lead ammunition is the risk to birds from ingesting lead shot as grit. This is well documented and I trust the GWCT on this. See their overview here: Effects of lead on wildlife and wildfowl - Game and Wildlife Conservation Trust

BASC is democratically run by members for its members and there is nothing stopping any member from getting involved in the AGM and asking questions there, voting for candidates for Council elections, or putting themselves forward for elections. There has only been one question at one AGM about lead since 2020. That is 4 AGMs gone by!

 

[Conor O'Gorman]

Did not know the HSE consultations were a vote for or against lead, so why should the number of respondents change the outcome?

Correct, it was not a vote. It was about the weight of evidence in those responses so well done to those 2,759 respondees for taking the time to challenge the HSE based on their experiences. A pity it was not more but so be it.

 

[Spear Chucker]

Fair enough, that is your view and those you know and there has been a tsunami of misinformation online over the years on lead. The truth will come to the surface in time and perhaps in time we will all wonder what all the fuss was about all those years ago. As regards BASC, as someone working on lead and many other policy issues for 15 years I just see colleagues working all hours for shooting and conservation. The key issue with lead ammunition is the risk to birds from ingesting lead shot as grit. This is well documented and I trust the GWCT on this. See their overview here: Effects of lead on wildlife and wildfowl - Game and Wildlife Conservation Trust

BASC is democratically run by members for its members and there is nothing stopping any member from getting involved in the AGM and asking questions there, voting for candidates for Council elections, or putting themselves forward for elections. There has only been one question at one AGM about lead since 2020. That is 4 AGMs gone by!

Many thanks Conor, good response, I however do not trust the GCWT evidence. What scientific evidence, (proven by the use of such tests as lead isotope mass spectrometry) is there that shows lead shotgun pellets pose a greater threat to food supply than the normal levels of lead found in all foods and drinks? The report made by Messrs Pain & Green about "game meat" and which has not been independently verified -and which is heavily biased- notwithstanding? Do GCWT include results of specific tests of lead isotope mass spectrometry in their findings, or are they "winging it" (pun intended) on the back of the "research" quoted by WWT (named as "friends" by Mr Packham et al)?
In reference to "democracy" the BASC system, as with many other lobbying organisations does not encourage member involvement. When your local representative's only answer to complex questions they haven't the wit to understand, is to shout louder - literally in my case- why would we engage?

 

[Smellydog]

If we get to that we need to see all lead flashing and roofing (churches etc) removed and soldering banned in construction.
Excerpt from a letter sent to my local MP, who sadly proved incapable of comprehending the information and just went quiet.

"In summary, metallic lead is a relatively inert metal, much more so than iron. To become a danger to the environment, fauna, flora and humans, metallic lead has to be turned into an organic / inorganic compound / ion. The same is true for iron.

Lead compounds can be highly dangerous, as can compounds of iron. Tetraethyl Lead, which was added as an anti-knocking agent to petrol for over 80 years and burned by the millions of tons (producing more harmful compounds) could kill you if it came into contact with your skin, yet metallic lead cannot be absorbed through your skin. Metallic iron cannot be absorbed through your skin yet Ferric Chloride (iron Chloride) can be absorbed and is highly dangerous, usually fatal.

Metallic lead is so inert that it is present, in billions of tons , on the vast majority of buildings in the UK, it is exposed to the erosive effects of wind, rain and sunshine as well as abrasion yet is not considered a danger. However metallic lead in relatively small amounts present in the sand traps of rifle shooting ranges exposed to the same forces, is considered so dangerous by HSE (without scientific comparison or explanation) that it is proposed it must be removed from those sand traps on a regular basis because of the dangers to human and animal life as well as the environment.

Acids do not react easily with metallic lead. Hydrochloric acid, present in our digestive system, does not dissolve metallic lead easily if at all, nor does metallic lead react with blood or plasma, as shown by bullets and pellets left in victims, as surgery is viewed as sometimes more harmful to remove those objects. There are still veterans of WW2 , the Korean war, Vietnamese and Northern Irish conflicts carrying metallic lead "souvenirs" - some for more than 80 years with no reported ill effects."

At last the truth not blurred by narrative.

 

[BryanDC]

and soldering banned in construction.

I understand that it's been illegal to use lead solder in plumbing since 1999 and almost every other use since 2006. So that's sorted.
Maybe lead flashing is still used but more and more alternatives like Wakaflex are being used. Here lead has been banned from new buildings since 2000 and for renovation of old buildings since 2007. I believe it can still be used for protected historical buildings. Funny thing is nobody really misses it or talks about it.

 

[Conor O'Gorman]

Many thanks Conor, good response, I however do not trust the GCWT evidence. What scientific evidence, (proven by the use of such tests as lead isotope mass spectrometry) is there that shows lead shotgun pellets pose a greater threat to food supply than the normal levels of lead found in all foods and drinks? The report made by Messrs Pain & Green about "game meat" and which has not been independently verified -and which is heavily biased- notwithstanding? Do GCWT include results of specific tests of lead isotope mass spectrometry in their findings, or are they "winging it" (pun intended) on the back of the "research" quoted by WWT (named as "friends" by Mr Packham et al)?
In reference to "democracy" the BASC system, as with many other lobbying organisations does not encourage member involvement. When your local representative's only answer to complex questions they haven't the wit to understand, is to shout louder - literally in my case- why would we engage?

You don't trust the GWCT - fair enough. Do you trust me?

 

[Spear Chucker]

You don't trust the GWCT - fair enough. Do you trust me?

Conor, from what I have seen of you, you are about as decent a man as can be found. Your question is tough to answer because it shouldn't come down to whether I trust, or should have to trust you. I am certainly strongly inclined to like you, which is different. I trust nobody, because all of us are made liars by circumstance in time, regardless of our determination to be better. I trust your good intent and good will. If it were a perfect world, I would not have to trust you because the science and good reason would be followed by all and the indisputable facts would speak for themselves. This is a political fight rather than a fact based argument, because the science is being perverted and misrepresented for political reasons. There is no case for the banning of lead shot or ammunition. When confronted by the hard questions, the supporters of a ban in this argument revert to emotion and prejudice. We see such things as editors of industry based magazines telling authors that they do not want to publish their scientifically based challenges to proponents of a ban "because they do not want to challenge their reader's perceptions". That speaks volumes to me.

 

[Conor O'Gorman]

Conor, from what I have seen of you, you are about as decent a man as can be found. Your question is tough to answer because it shouldn't come down to whether I trust, or should have to trust you. I am certainly strongly inclined to like you, which is different. I trust nobody, because all of us are made liars by circumstance in time, regardless of our determination to be better. I trust your good intent and good will. If it were a perfect world, I would not have to trust you because the science and good reason would be followed by all and the indisputable facts would speak for themselves. This is a political fight rather than a fact based argument, because the science is being perverted and misrepresented for political reasons. There is no case for the banning of lead shot or ammunition. When confronted by the hard questions, the supporters of a ban in this argument revert to emotion and prejudice. We see such things as editors of industry based magazines telling authors that they do not want to publish their scientifically based challenges to proponents of a ban "because they do not want to challenge their reader's perceptions". That speaks volumes to me

That is very kind of you and a thoughtful response. Thank you. The reason I asked I guess is because I was thinking from the POV that if you did not trust me then what would be the point of going to and fro with Q&As which as we have seen many times will have many others chipping in and it all ending in vitriol. However, my question was rather simplistic and your response has give me food for thought.