Lead update.

[enfieldspares]

So we can use the .22 centre fires with lead but not the .243. well the 22/250 seemed to work ok when larger tools were banned across the water.
So no worries.

Yes. In Ireland it was indeed the only C/F calibre allowed for deer. And some here can recall "Shooting Times" and "Notes From The Hill" where some were even using the .220 Swift - not named after the LAG fellow BTW!

I see no exemption for .22 Rimfire shotshell (if I am correct) nor 9mm Rimfire shotshell. As non-lead ammunition is not available for either will BASC be requesting that a compensation scheme be brought in for these two calibres and owners of such guns be paid out upon their surrender to such a scheme?

 

[Ratel]

Yes. In Ireland it was indeed the only C/F calibre allowed for deer. And some here can recall "Shooting Times" and "Notes From The Hill" where some were even using the .220 Swift - not named after the LAG fellow BTW!

I see no exemption for .22 Rimfire shotshell (if I am correct) nor 9mm Rimfire shotshell. As non-lead ammunition is not available for either will BASC be requesting that a compensation scheme be brought in for these two calibres and owners of such guns be paid out upon their surrender to such a scheme?

Yes but one or two used the 5.6x57 as well. I had no problems with 22/250 on Reds, Sika, hybrids or Fallow. My neighbour shot them all with a Hornet.

 

[Sishy]

I shoot mainly clays so steel will become the norm , most guns from late 80’s can shoot std steel and there is no need for a HP steel proof gun for clays but probably 3” chambers may be the norm, I think it will be the end of the local fibre wad only clubs of which I am a member of two, having said that it will speed up the requirement for alternative wads etc and manufactures will still want sell on treasure island !

 

[Smellydog]

Well I've just tested steel shot today and it's not only pathetic it's sad!
I lost a squirrel nearly, a pheasant and had I not run a third pheasant would of been lost.
Look, still very much alive, smoked it at 20yds yes!

My freaking muzzleloader kills better!

Look, somehow a 20yd squirrel that nearly fell out of the tree recovered, came down and into a hole. Fortunately my dog could reach it and when she got it out it was fiercely very much alive! Lead would of sent it flying but dead!

I smoked a pigeon whizzing over a hedge. I was expecting a thud on the ground. Err no, it recovered and flew to a thick blackthorn thicket, lost.
Unbelievably crap
I WILL NOT BE SUBJECTING WILDLIFE TO THIS CRUELTY AGAIN!
I will be stocking up however on lead and screw who ever thinks they think better, ****ers.

 

[enfieldspares]

Also as the UK is such a small market I think American bullet makers will tell the UK to "take a running jump" about the proposal that lead target bullets over 6.17mm calibre be marked on the box as required below (see p.12):

https://www.hse.gov.uk/reach/restrictions/rr-aavi-0821.pdf

A labelling requirement has been proposed for large calibre bullets used for target shooting
Following the proposal to restrict large calibre bullets for live quarry shooting, large calibre bullets for target shooting which remain on the market lawfully for that use will require a label specifying that those bullets are not to be used for live quarry shooting.

Leads us to this cloud cuckoo land think (see p.18):

Labelling of large calibre bullets for target shooting
Given the potential for misuse of “target shooting” bullets for live quarry shooting, additional labelling is proposed to aid in the enforcement of the restriction on large calibre bullets for live quarry shooting.

The packaging, as defined in GB CLP, of large calibre bullets that are placed on the market for the purposes of outdoor target shooting, or uses outside the scope of this restriction (such as indoor target shooting), shall bear a label indicating:

“Must not be used for live quarry shooting.”

The label should be indelible, clear and legible to customers at the point of sale (including on any product page for online sales). These details should be visibly distinct from the rest of the information included on the packaging. Given that large calibre bullets for civilian use are mostly imported, costs associated with labelling are expected to fall upon non-GB suppliers, as such they would not be considered as part of a GB impact assessment. In any event, any costs relating to the implementation of a simple label are expected to be low.

The last sentences (I have underlined them) are this cloud cuckoo think. Simply I think that the USA bullet makers will simply not change their box printing and labelling to suit the proposed nonsense and will, as I have suggested, merely walk away from the UK market.

I assume that the author of this labelling nonsense made no enquiry of the America SAAMI (Sporting Arms and Ammunition Manufacturers Institute) about their response to such labelling being required?

 

[billgatese30]

Also as the UK is such a small market I think American bullet makers will tell the UK to "take a running jump" about the proposal that lead target bullets over 6.17mm calibre be marked on the box as required below (see p.12):

https://www.hse.gov.uk/reach/restrictions/rr-aavi-0821.pdf

A labelling requirement has been proposed for large calibre bullets used for target shooting
Following the proposal to restrict large calibre bullets for live quarry shooting, large calibre bullets for target shooting which remain on the market lawfully for that use will require a label specifying that those bullets are not to be used for live quarry shooting.

Leads us to this cloud cuckoo land think (see p.18):

Labelling of large calibre bullets for target shooting
Given the potential for misuse of “target shooting” bullets for live quarry shooting, additional labelling is proposed to aid in the enforcement of the restriction on large calibre bullets for live quarry shooting.

The packaging, as defined in GB CLP, of large calibre bullets that are placed on the market for the purposes of outdoor target shooting, or uses outside the scope of this restriction (such as indoor target shooting), shall bear a label indicating:

“Must not be used for live quarry shooting.”

The label should be indelible, clear and legible to customers at the point of sale (including on any product page for online sales). These details should be visibly distinct from the rest of the information included on the packaging. Given that large calibre bullets for civilian use are mostly imported, costs associated with labelling are expected to fall upon non-GB suppliers, as such they would not be considered as part of a GB impact assessment. In any event, any costs relating to the implementation of a simple label are expected to be low.

The last sentences (I have underlined them) are this cloud cuckoo think. Simply I think that the USA bullet makers will simply not change their box printing and labelling to suit the proposed nonsense and will, as I have suggested, merely walk away from the UK market.

I assume that the author of this labelling nonsense made no enquiry of the America SAAMI (Sporting Arms and Ammunition Manufacturers Institute) about their response to such labelling being required?

Overlabelling happens often with items from the US (buy any Reeces chocolate or anything like that from B&M/Aldi etc. and have a look at the back of the pack!), and its applied by the importer. Although they will likely aim to recover the cost by adding a quid or two to each packet/box/bag they have to label before placing on the market.

 

[Greenmist]

Will have to see if I can find it but not that long ago there was an announcement that the Aussies have stopped their proposed ban on use of lead - there must be some science behind that decision so surely it can be applied just as much here as it can there? @Conor O'Gorman - is BASC aware of this & if so what are they doing about it? (Yes I’m a paid up BASC member & happy to provide details by PM as I’d like you to represent my interests in this respect please.)

IIRC Norway went back to lead for welfare issues, must be some science there that can be used

 

[Twodogs]

Having just spent far too long reading the report in full, all I can conclude is it will probably be trebles all round for the authors.

This report is a good example of smoke and mirrors, speculation and pure guesswork with very little fact, but why let that get in the way.

Anybody interested in making “lead bullets” in 6.16mm or 0.2429” diameter?

 

[Liveonce]

Now we need a legal expert as this is an Annex 15 proposal so possibly can become primary law as a legislative reform order which does not require a parliamentary bill.

over to @Conor O'Gorman

 

[JTO]

The main implications for rifles is the limiting of .243 versatility. A shame as that was the strength of the .243. 58 to 105grain bullets now limited to 80grain copper only!

"The prohibition of the use of large calibre lead ammunition for large quarry shooting"
That sounds like it can still be used for small quarry shooting.

 

[hendrix's rifle]

"The prohibition of the use of large calibre lead ammunition for large quarry shooting"
That sounds like it can still be used for small quarry shooting.

Reds are small quarry when compared to an elk or moose... They really want to tighten that loophole

 

[Twodogs]

Agency proposal as at:
Use 2a - large calibre lead bullets (greater than 6.27mm) (page 16)
A restriction is proposed on the placing on the market and use of large calibre lead bullets for live quarry shooting.

Nothing about quarry size!

 

[hendrix's rifle]

I'm probably in a minority here but I'm not too bothered. Shot copper CF ammunition for years and steel for wildfowl through some pretty ancient guns also never had a problem at sensible ranges. If I had a 100 yr old Purdey I'd cough up for the odd box of bismuth to shoot it? Presumably if I could afford the gun I could afford the bismuth? Shooting will be a bit more expensive but not horrendously so. Plenty more awful things going on in the world to worry about... But hey ho each to his own.

How many rounds do you put down range a year? How many targets do you shoot? Range days?

This is where it's all fallen apart, I'm alright jack attitude and mentality. Like Heym says, it's only another £1 a bullet and for a deer it's nothing. Very much correct. Now what about vermin? Foxing? They're bloody expensive carcasses now. Shooting your rifle over your permission for drop data, getting your eye in or just plain old shooting steel...
That extra £1 a bullet soon adds up for anything other than purely shooting deer. Won't be doing long range crows with the 243 any more!

 

[Zstalker]

"The prohibition of the use of large calibre lead ammunition for large quarry shooting"
That sounds like it can still be used for small quarry shooting.

The way I read it, its the diameter of the projectile that is the issue, anything under 243 is fine. 243 and above lead free only. So unless they can make lighter copper rounds the that means we have to stick to 80grain

 

[Utectok]

I'm not of the mindset "they're all out to get us". It's the mindset that bans everything on a whim, removing freedoms without any real, solid scientific evidence of direct correlation. I'd ban motorcycles, far more dangerous, and that's easily quantifiable. Another freedom gone, and so it continues.

I believe there is solid scientific evidence that lead is a poisonous substance and this legislation stems from that. I mean if you could remove a toxic substance from shooting with no negative consequences you’d do it right. I suppose the issue is if there are effective alternatives. I think there are and some think there are not. That’s fine although I think often people have never seriously tried the alternatives and formed an opinion before using them. Anyway you make some good points.

 

[Utectok]

How many rounds do you put down range a year? How many targets do you shoot? Range days?

This is where it's all fallen apart, I'm alright jack attitude and mentality. Like Heym says, it's only another £1 a bullet and for a deer it's nothing. Very much correct. Now what about vermin? Foxing? They're bloody expensive carcasses now. Shooting your rifle over your permission for drop data, getting your eye in or just plain old shooting steel...
That extra £1 a bullet soon adds up for anything other than purely shooting deer. Won't be doing long range crows with the 243 any more!

I shoot about 1000 rounds a year and the price difference between the lead bullets I historically have shot and copper is negligible. About a £1.25 to £1 for quality lead or copper. I get you can get cheaper lead bullets but I’ve always shot premium ones as I see it as a worthwhile expense. Spend the money at the hook end to use a fishing analogy.

 

[Smellydog]

I believe there is solid scientific evidence that lead is a poisonous substance and this legislation stems from that. I mean if you could remove a toxic substance from shooting with no negative consequences you’d do it right. I suppose the issue is if there are effective alternatives. I think there are and some think there are not. That’s fine although I think often people have never seriously tried the alternatives and formed an opinion before using them. Anyway you make some good points.

I tried steel shot today and it failed miserably.
Post in thread 'Lead update.' Lead update.

 

[Smellydog]

Agency proposal as at:
Use 2a - large calibre lead bullets (greater than 6.27mm) (page 16)
A restriction is proposed on the placing on the market and use of large calibre lead bullets for live quarry shooting.

Nothing about quarry size!

Wait, so 243 can use lead. 243 is 6.1mm.

 

[Utectok]

I tried steel shot today and it failed miserably.
Post in thread 'Lead update.' Lead update.

I saw that and I’d encourage you to get a few more shots in before forming an opinion. I’ve shot 1000 of pigeons with steel for feeding birds of prey and although steel is not brilliant its ok at sensible ranges. That’s been my experience anyway.

 

[Donkey Basher]

Wait, so 243 can use lead. 243 is 6.1mm.

6.17mm