Lead shot on pheasant days?

There is also some research in the States that in areas where there is a lot of wildfowling that iron salts in the water are starting to cause problems! Iron is much, much more soluble in cold water than lead! Still I suppose we mustn't let facts get in the way of a "good" policy!

David.
Makes me laugh all this talk of non toxic saving the environment. Everything that is being pushed as an alternative is just as toxic to the environment , if not more toxic than lead. I worked for the EA as an enforcement officer for a while, specifically with fisheries, we knew of streams in our catchment that were devoid of life because of high levels of naturally occurring metals plus watercourses devoid of life because of iron contaminated water from mines etc.

Yes we know lead is toxic (at certain levels) to humans and the environment, but so is iron, copper, aluminium and a host of other naturally occurring metals.

From what I've read, no game shot with lead has failed World Health Organisation recommendations on lead content, there is no actual evidence of people being harmed by consuming game shot with lead.

In fact if you test anything made using grain such as wheat, barely etc, all will contain traces of metals simply because the plants naturally absorb heavy metals whilst growing and concentrate them in the seed. People who have been poisoned by lead have usually been exposed to it or consumed it via other mechanisms.

The main argument seems to be the damage caused to the environment by having areas where densities of spent shot are high, this contamination will continue, even if we loose lead, it will just be with another substance. Personally I think that where there may be high concentrations of lead shot, the simple answer is to limit the amount that may be deposited over an area per year, wouldn't be hard as we know the weight of a cartridges shot load and shoots could stipulate the required cartridge, hence knowing how many shots may be fired over a particular drive per year and which drives to "rest" on a rotor.

It could also be argued that since most Drives take place through woodland, the threat to contaminated crops and water courses is limited and so could be permitted to have heavier levels of spent shot.

This style of management is nothing new, farmers are restricted on how many kgs of nitrogen they can spread (natural and artificial fertilizer), factories have to limit levels of harmful substances discharged into rivers, where they use abstracted water for manufacturing.

Rough shooting / walked up / pigeon decoying, the spent shot densities are low compared to large commercial shoots, so would be outside the scope of the management system.

In regards to energy levels / range /effective killing, unless another substance that is a soft as lead and the same density is found, nothing will be as effective as lead when used in a shotgun (plus I hate copper bullets in rifles, having used them for contracts) you can not alter the laws of physics!!!!!!

End of rant, tin hat on.
 
The best in all tests were Remington nitro steel 2's from John Forsey's . I still have a box for special occasions and they kick like a mule !!.

I used them when I was wildfowling through a 12/89 Yildiz Wildfowler s/s: they were the sh1t, frankly! I mean yes, they belted your shoulder, but it was a big heavy gun and you don't exactly let off a lot of shots on the foreshore. I used the 3" ones for ducks, 3.5 for geese, or fumbled them and mixed them all up, but there was never any doubt that that would hammer anything that was hit. It's why I'm utterly unbothered by this lead ban. Sure, they were a bit expensive but it was a marginal cost in the overall experience.
 
I used them when I was wildfowling through a 12/89 Yildiz Wildfowler s/s: they were the sh1t, frankly! I mean yes, they belted your shoulder, but it was a big heavy gun and you don't exactly let off a lot of shots on the foreshore. I used the 3" ones for ducks, 3.5 for geese, or fumbled them and mixed them all up, but there was never any doubt that that would hammer anything that was hit. It's why I'm utterly unbothered by this lead ban. Sure, they were a bit expensive but it was a marginal cost in the overall experience.

Marginal cost relative to the cost of having to buy a new gun. On the plus side, thank you for pointing out that I only need to spend £900-odd quid swapping a perfectly good-quality, hand-made, well-balanced and lightish English gun for some heavyweight Turkish super-magnum drainpipe. I will be delighted by the far less pleasant shooting experience. Of course the extra noise is also bound to be popular with neighbours.
Now what else could I do with that money?....it's more than a decade's BASC subscription, hmm.
 
Either way, they'll pack a punch at short to medium ranges and then run out of steam when compared to similar lead loads.
 
Marginal cost relative to the cost of having to buy a new gun. On the plus side, thank you for pointing out that I only need to spend £900-odd quid swapping a perfectly good-quality, hand-made, well-balanced and lightish English gun for some heavyweight Turkish super-magnum drainpipe. I will be delighted by the far less pleasant shooting experience. Of course the extra noise is also bound to be popular with neighbours.
Now what else could I do with that money?....it's more than a decade's BASC subscription, hmm.

There's always golf...
 
If anyone becomes aware of a steel 32g load in size 3 in a 2 3/4" cartridge with biodegradable wad which is guaranteed to work in 3 1/4 ton standard proofed guns with full choke, and also guaranteed to be effective at range - despite ballistics proving that they aren't. I shall be most grateful.
 
Makes me laugh all this talk of non toxic saving the environment. Everything that is being pushed as an alternative is just as toxic to the environment , if not more toxic than lead. I worked for the EA as an enforcement officer for a while, specifically with fisheries, we knew of streams in our catchment that were devoid of life because of high levels of naturally occurring metals plus watercourses devoid of life because of iron contaminated water from mines etc.

Yes we know lead is toxic (at certain levels) to humans and the environment, but so is iron, copper, aluminium and a host of other naturally occurring metals.

From what I've read, no game shot with lead has failed World Health Organisation recommendations on lead content, there is no actual evidence of people being harmed by consuming game shot with lead.

In fact if you test anything made using grain such as wheat, barely etc, all will contain traces of metals simply because the plants naturally absorb heavy metals whilst growing and concentrate them in the seed. People who have been poisoned by lead have usually been exposed to it or consumed it via other mechanisms.

The main argument seems to be the damage caused to the environment by having areas where densities of spent shot are high, this contamination will continue, even if we loose lead, it will just be with another substance. Personally I think that where there may be high concentrations of lead shot, the simple answer is to limit the amount that may be deposited over an area per year, wouldn't be hard as we know the weight of a cartridges shot load and shoots could stipulate the required cartridge, hence knowing how many shots may be fired over a particular drive per year and which drives to "rest" on a rotor.

It could also be argued that since most Drives take place through woodland, the threat to contaminated crops and water courses is limited and so could be permitted to have heavier levels of spent shot.

This style of management is nothing new, farmers are restricted on how many kgs of nitrogen they can spread (natural and artificial fertilizer), factories have to limit levels of harmful substances discharged into rivers, where they use abstracted water for manufacturing.

Rough shooting / walked up / pigeon decoying, the spent shot densities are low compared to large commercial shoots, so would be outside the scope of the management system.

In regards to energy levels / range /effective killing, unless another substance that is a soft as lead and the same density is found, nothing will be as effective as lead when used in a shotgun (plus I hate copper bullets in rifles, having used them for contracts) you can not alter the laws of physics!!!!!!

End of rant, tin hat on.
We need lots more to rant, keep it coming, flaming herbivores do plenty of ranting, (don't eat this, dont kill that, you musnt say this or that you might offend someone in outer Mongolia :old:
 
I am party under Non disclosure to a lot of research that clearly shows that even mildly high lead levels in your body is a major factor in many many cancers. We are not talking anywhere like toxic levels, just a little above the norm. Your body cannot get rid of lead once it is adsorbed. Stomach acid is a bout the same PH as battery acid, and any lead particles that are ingested will dissolve somewhat in your stomach. Bear in mind that a meal of meat takes a few hours to digest so plenty of time for lead pellets to dissolve somewhat, even easier is that very small lead particles in venison.

There is also a growing body of evidence to show that plants growing on lead contaminated land may also take lead into leaf, seeds etc etc. So eating a salad or grains grown on land with a high concentration of lead may not be a good thing.

I happily bring down Ducks and Geese on the Foreshore - high flying with a 36gram High performance Steel load of No 4's using a modern Franchi. Modern Steel cartridges work well.

I love my old guns - and they will be used with appropriate non-toxic in the future. If I want longer range, then I will use a modern gun.

EDIT,

In the meantime manufacturers are responding to the challenge.

Just reading this months Vintage Gun Journal - I quote

"One recent development that may impact auction prices is the introduction by Eley of a true 2 1/2” (65mm) cased steel shot cartridge with a bio-degradable wad for game shooting. This is a Standard Proof steel load that we are advised may be used in guns proof tested with lead after 1954 and with barrels in good condition and chokes of not more than Half Choke constriction. This may serve to reassure users of British game guns that they can hang on to their old favourites and carry on shooting should a lead ban be introduced in the future, as seems likely." - full article here - Auctions Stir from Covid Slumber.

And for those shooting High Phaesant's with older Guns - have a look at Gamebore NEW Dark Storm with Precision Steel and Biowad.


It looks like the Cartridge Manufacturers have been kick started into developing new products that will be suitable for use in pretty much most guns in regular use. Do we still use Lead in Petrol or in Paints??
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: VSS
I think it's true that there are strides being made in the right direction. But whatever the manufacturers (or those who read their blurb) say, it's a simple fact of life that lead is denser than steel and therefore steel really cannot perform to the same level as lead. I do use steel on wildfowl quite effectively but only at closer ranges than I would dare on a high pheasant. At longer ranges you can hear the shot bouncing off birds sometimes, where lead would penetrate.

So those strides that the manufacturers' are making? There's a few to go yet to ensure doing away with lead shot won't be a backward step for shooters. And it would be really helpful if the results, when and if they materialise, don't cost the annual expenditure of a small country for a box of 25.
 
Back
Top