Curmudgeon

I started this thread - http://huntingny.com/forums/topic/32001-good-column-on-non-lead-ammo/ Mike started this one all by his lonesome, because he wanted the discussion I "instigated" to be more of a debate, to actually involve evidence. There is an easy way to get this all to stop.

I am only responding to posts, like yours. This has been going on for what, 10 days now since the first thread started?

This debate is in some ways is Rorschach test. For some it is about poisoning eagles and other wildlife. Those concerned about human health see something else. The single-issue 2nd Amendment guys see it as a threat. I had one guy tell me it was all right to use copper bullets for better performance but it was not acceptable to discuss the food chain and wildlife issues. Doc - Like so many others who argue against using less toxic alternatives, your rhetoric is overblown. 4S says mutations. You are calling the incremental affects on small children "tragic health disasters". I too have been eating small game and venison most of my life. I would never consider that the lead may not have impacted me. Like you, I grew up around cars spewing lead, lead paint and lead solder in the plumbing. Neither of us knows what would have been if we had not had that lead in our system. There is no doubt that lead is bad, and especially so for children. So WHY, do you and others try to diminish these concerns by intentionally exaggerating them? Knowing what you know, if you had a toddler now, would you feed it small game with lead pellets in it?

Don't know anything about Magneto or Wolverine. It goes into bones. Some is probably excreted. They stopped his exposure before they expected damage to occur. If they were correct, he would have avoided damage. Adults and children react differently. Eagle blood lead levels drop months after deer season ends. That does not mean they did not suffer neurological damage.

My friend who retired from Remington worked for a while firing rifles. His blood was tested monthly (I think) and when it went above a threshold, he was reassigned until it went back down to another threshold. I am certain Remington kept within legal levels in the air.

From http://www.cdc.gov/nceh/lead/: Today at least 4 million households have children living in them that are being exposed to high levels of lead. There are approximately half a million U.S. children ages 1-5 with blood lead levels above 5 micrograms per deciliter (µg/dL), the reference level at which CDC recommends public health actions be initiated.

It doesn't matter where the debate is as long as people are reading it. Make intelligent and informed choices.

Steve - You make some good points. Bullets are not the most significant source of lead for most people. They are a source and that is a good reason to be careful with your baby. This is about making better choices, not a ban on lead. I wish it had been routine to check children for lead when mine were young. Certainly, they got more from the paint in the old farmhouse than the 7/8oz Remington slugs I used to use. Slugs are less likely to fragment than bullets. Your venison is probably safer than that from the average deer killed in a rifle area. The talk about eating venison for hundreds of years is meaningless, even though it keeps coming up. Venison was not a significant part of anyone's diet in NYS from the end of the 19th to the middle of the 20th Century. The problem comes mostly from bullets in high-powered rifles, not slow black powder which was used to eliminate deer from the landscape during the 19th Century. Deer were rare before the 1950s so venison was not eaten much. Most developmental problems from eating lead are incremental. An IQ change of a few points would not be measurable or noticeable in an individual except for severe cases. Some things to think about: Road-kills (deer and other species) regularly contain bullets and shot. I know someone who has been checking. I don't have those data. Some were euthanized. Some were wounded and lived (woodchucks and raccoons esp.) . Apparently, some people use bird shot as deer repellent. It remains in their muscles after healing. Your 10 μg/dL level is either for adults, or obsolete. No one uses that number for children anymore. I know if I had to do it over again, my children would not eat venison killed with lead, even slugs. I am really curious how much lead my childless 36 year old daughter has in her bones. Venison probably accounted for 30-40% of the meat she ate before leaving home. I doubt she would allow me to check. She is very smart and excessively educated. How smart would she have been if....................................? Another thing to think about: It isn't just about human health. If you care about eagles, hawks, etc., the lead in the gut pile is your toxic legacy.

This quote that Rob recycled is bizarre: "To date, there have not been any cases of human illnesses linked to lead particles in hunter-harvested venison or other wild game." The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention state, for children "lead may impair development and have harmful health effects even at lower levels, and there is no known safe exposure level." "There is no known safe exposure level" for children because even below the threshold of 5 μg/dL, damage is done. "Impairing development" may still leave a child within the average range so nothing is evident. Lead from any source can be responsible for such "impairment". Since meat killed with lead raises blood-lead levels to a measurable level (at least at a population scale, if not the one baby cited), it follows that these levels are unacceptable for children. Those low levels can accumulate in a females' bones over a lifetime for release during pregnancy and nursing, even if they never cause a measurable problem for her. Such is the value of discussing "illnesses".

These are NYS camera trapping data from early winter to late winter 2012. 8 Sites were operated that season – Chemung (1), Chenango (1), Oneida (1) and Otsego (5) Counties. Bait was road-killed deer checked for bullet holes. Since data entry requires the examination of tens of thousands of photos, this is the most recent year completed. Geographically, the percentages would change, possibly significantly. If someone has better data on scavengers, please share it. Percentage of days is not the number of individuals. There may have been 50 ravens or 1. Same with the others.

The season is almost over. Golden eagles are migrating. One site that is still operating has a bunch of birds feeding, including 2 we telemetered. This photo is the only one we have ever gotten 3 at one photo in NYS. They usually wait until another leaves. I really like the photo of the eagle chasing the coyote.

Note: Since this was published, the threshold for lead poisoning in children has been dropped to 5 micrograms per deciliter from 10. Quote from above: "Both the North Dakota and Minnesota studies contain recommendations for hunters and others who consume game meat harvested with lead-based bullets. Among the recommendations is an advisory that children under the age of six and pregnant women should not consume game meat harvested with lead bullets." Why is that if there is no problem?

"Too costly" is relative - and as Mike noted above - not necessarily "prohibitive". The skeet field discussion is not directly related to health issues hand. However, it does involve the cost issue and clearly illustrates that hunters are not the only source of ammunition based lead in the environment. The geese and doves that pick up grit at skeet fields are being poisoned by a poison environment - no different from landing in the water of the old copper mine in Butte and dying. No different than eating pesticide on a lawn. Skeet fields are a separate debate. "Too costly", or "prohibitively" expensive depends on several factors. As Mike says, this is "subjective". Your income, the amount of ammunition you use hunting - not skeet shooting, and, your tolerance for risk all matter. Steve - with the new baby (luckily a lead-free baby) may have a very different tolerance for risk than the mother of his child were she well informed. The fact that the baby is lead free is likely due to the baby's physical environment, the mother's historic diet, how much wild game she currently consumes, the plumbing in the house and municipality, Steve's butchering practices and luck. For deer hunting, most responsible hunters only fire several rounds at deer each season. This is not "too costly". Bullet 2 was clearly about secondary poisoning of wildlife. That it is stated in a slightly ambiguous way does not change that. Everyone knows what it means. VJP - You acknowledge your gut piles are consumed by scavengers. You agree with bullet 2. Guessing which species are responsible, and implying they don't matter, adds nothing here. I have scavenger data that shows a much larger range of scavengers. You are choosing species not to care about. Digression: VJP - Yes, the CDC has a health agenda, just like the doctors who wrote the report on the ND VDP. You are just playing with words here - "gang violence" can be "gun violence". In the spirit of this post, can you show that CDC is not concerned with "Gang violence"? CDC is also concerned with suicide. Guns in the house are a known suicide risk, especially for males. Do you object to these data also? http://aje.oxfordjournals.org/content/160/10/929.full

From across the pond: "Controversial report claims shooting is placing thousands of children at risk of brain damage because of eating game killed with lead ammunition"http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/earth/countryside/11924359/Countryside-at-odds-over-lead-risk-to-children-who-eat-game.html

I would only quibble by asking you to cite the specific report in which the "the majority of meat samples" had lead in them.

Mike - I see nothing here to debate. The facts in your first 2 bullet points are well established. The other 4 points have been demonstrated repeatedly.

I think the VDP could continue to do good work but they need to be proactive. Even if it were done quietly, it could be done. Or, as shawnhu implies, let them eat cake.

It isn't a perfect parallel but cigarettes went from being completely acceptable in every situation to being marginalized. Science was questioned in the same way. I don't understand your last sentence. People didn't care and that is why smoking was banned indoors?

Description from the web site: There are significant impacts of deer and invasive plant species on forests and woodlands, and these deer and plant impacts can interact. Join Dr. Bernd Blossey of the Cornell University Department of Natural Resources for this webinar. Bernd will introduce new metrics on how to assess deer damage and then discuss implementation of suburban deer management programs in the Ithaca area. These new approaches have resulted in substantial deer reductions in several towns and may function as a blueprint for other communities struggling to find their own process to deal with overabundant deer herds. Presented march 16, 2016 by Dr. Bernd Blossey Cornell University Department of Natural Resources. http://cornellforestconnect.ning.com/events/webinar-deer-and-invasive-plants

There are some parallels that can be drawn between the use of lead ammunition and cigarettes. It used to be that cigs were accepted everywhere. Everyone had ash trays in the house, even non-smokers. Over time - as the orchestrated denial of the health impacts became background noise - smoking indoors became less and less acceptable. I see that as the direction lead ammo is going. The deniers will hold their ground as long as they can. Others will slowly change to remove lead from their diet.

Thanks Virgil.

Shawn - You really think that someone advocating a ban would come here to do so? You may not think I am very smart but I can assure you, I am not that dumb.

Yes, lead has been used for hundreds of years. For most of that history, single bullets have been low speed projectiles fired with black powder. The fragmentation issue was extremely limited. The advent of high speed, high powered rifles resulted in bullets fragmenting into hundreds of tiny pieces. It necessitated a change in bullet design that is still ongoing. Since very few deer were consumed in NYS during the first half of the last century, the consumption of significant amounts of lead from a venison source didn't really start until after most of us were born. In the doses we are discussing, lead does not turn humans into drooling "zombies". I remember as a kid biting into shot in rabbit and pheasant. The same is true later in life from turkey. We used to hunt them with lead shot. Maybe my IQ is 5 points lower than it would have been. I certainly could use those 5 points now, if for no other reason than to argue with you guys. Maybe my children have lower IQs than they would have. I can't change the past but my granddaughters do not eat game killed with lead. There is a study of humans who consume lead killed game. It compared several cohorts including urban people who live in dilapidated housing with old urban infrastructure. It turns out that the urban cohort has higher blood lead levels than the game eaters. However, the game eaters have higher blood lead levels that those in similar environments that do not eat game killed with lead. For those of you who continue to use lead bullets, there will be some lead in your meat. More or less depending on the butchering methods, bullet design and shot placement. You are welcome to eat all you want. The question is, are you willing to risk your child's future? There will be no "apocalypse". Maybe some trouble with the math homework but not an apocalypse. CDC says "no level is safe". Who is willing to risk themselves or their kids? Mike - I considered the comments on toxicities in wild fish to be a red herring so didn't bother with them. Red Herrings can be toxic too. I paraphrase this as: "We should not be concerned about any one contaminant because we eat others." Lead accumulates in bone. It mimics calcium in the body. Secondary poisoning from lead in bone might happen with small animals consumed by raptors but is probably minimal. When you look at blood lead levels in larger raptors, the of peaks and valleys are perfectly timed with big game season. The lead isotopes are the same as lead in bullets. When blood copper levels are examined, even the copper isotopes match bullet jackets. The propaganda that eagles and condors are getting the lead from some other source is just that, propaganda. These birds eat only meat. They do not eat flaking paint off the front porch. Women of child bearing age are another matter, especially those that nurse. They draw calcium from their bones to supplement what is not provided from their diet. A female with an early diet with lead is not only affected herself, her yet to be conceived children may well be affected. "Lead moves from where it is stored in a mother's skeleton, during later pregnancy and lactation, when the need for calcium increases." and ".......... human milk is the most important food source for infants. Breast milk can, however, also be a pathway of maternal excretion of toxic elements such as lead."- http://www.lead.org.au/lanv6n2/update002.html& http://www.lead.org.au/lanv6n2/update014.html

You are arguing against a ban. I am arguing for people to voluntarily switch. There are compelling reasons for deer hunters to use copper bullets: human health ( yes you can mitigate how much lead is in your meat by butchering yourself but did you get it all? Probably not.); wildlife health; and, better terminal performance. How many of you who do not use monolithic bullets for deer hunting are willing to switch? If not, why not?

Guilty as charged. Sorry.