vlywaterman

I think you hit the nail on the head, 1. lead is harmful,,,,, we can agree on that 2. can cause brain damage, lower IQ ,, that's the catch, it may or can 3. so, I think most hunters have had the opportunity to be affected by lead. look at this from the CDC that has been posted before"While there is no known endogenous role for lead, and no known level of exposure that is without effect, the variety of standards and guidelines acknowledges that some exposure to lead is unavoidable." from:http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/hac/pha/LeadFragmentsinVenison/Venison%20and%20Lead%20HC%20110408.pdf

smoking may cause cancer, wearing a seatbelt may lessen your chance of dying in an automobile crash, extensive drinking may cause liver damage, and so on, not definitive. But lets look at the odds(or science). About the bullets, I needed some different rounds right away for demonstration purposes so I got them at Gander Mtn. All 243, Remington Premier AccuTip, $38.88 a premium lead round, Barnes Vor-TX, $38.88 (copper), and Remington Core Lokt $19.88, cheap lead. The grouping on the two premium were great,,, the cheap ones,,, not so good, but they are cheap to shoot. I'm hoping that many hunters will voluntarily switch to non-lead, we have other real battles to fight.

Of course I'm biased, I don't deny that, I'm trying to convince hunters to switch to non-lead ammo, but I'm using science backed information to try to show why it is important. "The bunch" I represent are mostly hunters who will look at the science and make an intelligent decision based on that, to protect their families and the environment. I'm not forcing anyone to do anything,,,,, just putting information out there, with links to actual science studies. I'm still waiting for some science studies that claim lead in ammo is not a concern.

Is this one persons opinion(Jim Mathews)? where is the science? banned lead ammunition for hunting in condor country,,, complete ban for hunting doesn't go into effect for a few more years,,,so I don't think they can decide if the ban has helped yet or not. and what about that survey by the NSSF, how many hunters? and do you think the NSSF may be an unbiased organization to conduct a survey?

I just came across this in an article which about the lead and condors. from: http://www.naturalhistorymag.com/perspectives/082655/condors-and-carcasses The National Rifle Association (NRA) disputes the view that lead ammunition from gut piles or game carrion left in the field by hunters is the primary source of lead exposure to condors. They claim that “there is compelling evidence of alternative sources of lead in the environment. Such alternative sources of lead include paint chips from old buildings, legacy leaded gasoline in soils, mining wastes, old insecticides and microtrash.” While it is true that there are other potential sources of lead in the environment, to date no published scientific data shows another credible pathway of exposure from sources other than ammunition for the vast majority of the cases. From 2002 to 2011, the Santa Cruz team analyzed the blood-lead data collected on 110 free-flying condors by the Condor Recovery Program, and about 80 percent of the birds were found to have lead isotope signatures (ratios of two naturally occurring stable lead isotopes that are often characteristic of a particular source) that were consistent with lead-based ammunition or fragments, whereas only five condors were found to have blood-lead signatures consistent with lead-based paint. The latter was traced to legacy lead paint peeling off of an old fire tower. There was no evidence that any of the 110 tested condors were significantly affected by lead from legacy leaded gasoline in soils or microtrash.

can't seem to get just the graph, here is the link, look at the graph on page three. That goes with my statement on the last post. https://www.biologicaldiversity.org/campaigns/get_the_lead_out/pdfs/Neumann_2009.pdf and this, seems to coincide with hunting season, and of course frozen carcasses/gut piles will last well into spring particularly if there is plenty of snow cover. We are talking about 12,000-18,000 deer being harvested per year from 2001-2008, that is a lot of gut piles, and they estimated 10% were wounded and lost.

trying to attach a graph, formatting problems.

Al, I couldn't agree with you more, this is much different than eating the tiny bit of lead in venison. And if you are doing your own hunting and butchering, you probably do a very good job and get most of the lead out. As for me, and I say again, as for me, I don't want to risk that, because I don't have to. For the tiny bit of extra expense, I can be sure I don't get any lead in my venison. Rattler, we can be fairly certain that some of those fish do have lead shot in them, an immature bald eagle I picked up last year laying in a ditch by Grand Gorge had high zinc levels, the rehabber thought it might be from lures. Nonlead ammo doesn't fix everything, but it is something I can easily do something about. this link from a number of sources suggests that eagles are poisoned by us hunters. http://esapubs.org/archive/appl/A025/092/appendix-A.php Eagles are opportunistic scavengers, consuming big-game carrion primarily when it is most available and when alternative food sources are less available (Kelly et al. 2011, Bedrosian et al. 2012, Finkelstein et al. 2012, Nadjafzadeh et al. 2013). Golden Eagles (Aquila chrysaetos) scavenge primarily in the late fall and winter when carrion is preserved by colder temperatures, and more rarely in late spring and summer unless the carrion is fresh (Kochert et al. 2002). Eagles are efficient at detecting carcasses and gut piles, which are typically consumed within hours of the game animal’s death (Fisher et al. 2006, Kelly et al. 2011). Eagles are exposed to lead when scavenging on animal carcasses and gut piles that hunters leave in the field. Lead residue in carcasses and gut piles is largely due to fragmentation of ammunition, which can number in the hundreds of fragments per carcass or gut pile (Hunt et al. 2006, Craighead and Bedrosian 2008, Harmata and Restani 2013). Hunt et al. (2006, 2009) found no lead fragments of any size in only 10% of 20 deer gut piles examined in Wyoming and California; while Warner (2014) reported no lead fragments in 64% of 25 deer gut piles from Illinois, where “many hunters” use lead ammunition and some use non-lead bullets. In addition, Hunt et al. (2006) found that many lead bullet fragments were “minute.” “Ingestion of very small particles of lead would explain the accumulation of sublethal levels in the blood of golden eagles during the hunting season” (Wayland and Bollinger 1999). Eagles typically regurgitate undigested bones and feathers once daily at dawn (Duke et al. 1975), and ingested lead pellets are also typically regurgitated within a week and most often within 2 days – but not before some lead is eroded (Pattee et al. 1981). Hunt et al. (2006, 2009), Green et al. (2008), and Bedrosian et al. (2012) have documented lead exposure levels in eagles as a predictable function of the number of big game animals shot with lead and hence contaminated carcasses and gut piles available. Seasonal peaks in blood lead levels associated with game hunting seasons and local exposure to shot game animals have been widely and consistently reported for eagles and other avian scavengers (e.g., Pattee et al. 1990, Wayland and Bollinger 1999, Bedrosian and Craighead 2009, Stauber et al. 2010, Fernandez et al. 2011, Kelly et al. 2011, Kelly and Johnson 2011, Bedrosian et al. 2012, Cruz-Martinez et al. 2012, Rideout et al. 2012, Harmata and Restani 2013, Nadjafzadeh et al. 2013). and this, seems to coincide with hunting season, and of course frozen carcasses/gut piles will last well into spring particularly if there is plenty of snow cover. We are talking about 12,000-18,000 deer being harvested per year from 2001-2008, that is a lot of gut piles, and they estimated 10% were wounded and lost.

fair enough Al, and I will not sit idly by while the sheep are getting false assurances from no science that using lead ammo has no affect on either wildlife or humans when real science says it does. Do you believe that there was a lead problem in Flint? How many people did you see that "got any significant lead poisoning sickness from" drinking the water?

I think I quoted the actual report, not an interpretation. and these are about 8 years old. It's ok if you want to use your information, but lets keep the facts as facts, this is the study, not my interpretation or some author writing for the NSSF, who may not be a scientist. In the following conclusion,(I quoted) we can take the last part of the last sentence and say it's an insignificant health hazard, but that is not what the whole study says. I was tempted to cut that part off, but I wanted to be honest. Another CDC consultation for Wisconsin, done before the study in ND. http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/HAC/pha/LeadFragmentsinVenison/Venison and Lead HC 110408.pdf Conclusions The quantified presence of lead bullet fragments in venison intended for human consumption indicates that a completed exposure pathway exists for the ingestion of lead- contaminated meat. The modeled exposure estimates, based on currently available field data, indicate that even at the lowest exposure scenario, there is predicted risk of elevated lead levels in blood among children consuming venison shot with lead ammunition. Because elevated blood lead has not been confirmed among consumers of venison, and because the measured lead content in venison varies greatly, there is an indeterminate public health hazard among those consumers.

this is what the study says, those that ate game meat had a higher concentration of lead in their blood, this is not insignificant. Read it yourself.http://soarraptors.org/wp-content/uploads/NorthDakotaCDCreport.pdf These findings have population-wide implications, since a substantial proportion of the population in the United States, including hunters and their families as well as low-income families, consume wild game as a major source of protein and may be exposed to this environmental source of lead. Most of these participants (81.8%) reported that the meat was processed by themselves or family members and: Results: Most participants reported consuming wild game (80.8%) obtained from hunting (98.8%). The geometric mean PbB were 1.27 and 0.84 mg/dl among persons who did and did not consume wild game, respectively. After adjusting for potential confounders, persons who consumed wild game had 0.30 mg/ dl (95% confidence interval: 0.16–0.44 mg/dl) higher PbB than persons who did not. For all game types, recent (o1 month) wild game consumption was associated with higher PbB. PbB was also higher among those who consumed a larger serving size (Z2 oz vs. o2 oz); however, this association was significant for ‘other game’ consumption only. Conclusions: Participants who consumed wild game had higher PbB than those who did not consume wild game.

Someone in the beginning of this thread asked about a consensus. It's not just a dermatologist(and it was the CDC by the way that did the study), and it's not just the Peregrine Fund. I posted a link that lots of scientists had signed on to, and looking at papers a consensus of papers say this is true, and I am still waiting for someone to post a link to a science study(other than the one from "truth out"), that says that lead is not affecting wildlife, and is not a problem in your game meat.

Rob, yes, that is so true, some "science" is not really science. This is a link to just what we are talking about, with a bit of a twist.

The NSSF is your source for science? Did you read the CDC study? (And they have since lowered the level from 10 to 5) They also say no level of lead is not without consequences, there is no safe level,,,, the people who ate game meat did have a lower lead level than the national average, but it was higher than those that did not(not insignificant). They got lead from eating game meat, no safe level, why would anyone feed lead to their family,,,, because we have always done that? Because people aren't dying from it? Where is your science saying that it is ok, or that it doesn't affect wildlife?

I forgot that I had talked to one of the authors of a recent paper that works for USFWS as a biologist. I had wanted to use one of his pictures in my display. http://www.fwspubs.org/doi/abs/10.3996/032013-JFWM-029

first of all, my son was reading the posts this morning,,,, he said,'dad, you were doing really well until you mentioned the latte, why did you do that?" it wasn't meant as an insult toward anyone, just going along with my "smart car". Airedale, do you think that if they were worried about the condors in CA they would have been better off with or without a ban? Many Arizona hunters are switching voluntarily for the condors benefit and because they are doing an ammo exchange. I think most hunters do the right thing, not because it is the law, but because they believe that it is the right thing to do. When you are alone in the woods, the chance of you getting caught doing whatever are pretty slim. If one does a google search on lead and eagles or condors, there are a lot of studies,,,,,,, and many of these have been published, so depending on the journal most of these are peer reviewed. I have a really hard time finding any papers that say lead does not affect wildlife. I'm not being sarcastic, or condescending,,, someone please post some links to papers saying that lead in game meat may not be harmful, or that using lead has no effect on wildlife. Are there other things that are more critical? absolutely, but I'm looking at one that we can change.

yes, and I can't shoot copper at targets if I'm just wanting to plink either, especially for 223 or pistol ammo. But I use cheap lead for fun, and the copper when I'm serious.

Not every hunter can afford non-lead ammo. I even posted facts on the price difference. Really? give up your lattes a couple of days and you can afford an extra $10-$20/ box, how many deer do you shoot? and how many bullets do you need to shoot those,,,,plus a few rounds to sight in your rifle,,,,,, it really isn't that big of a deal.

Bowguy, in answer to some of your questions. http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/hunting/lead/short-summary.html this explains results with different types of bullets, it was done on sheep, but they are pretty close to deer. this one was 9 hunters shooting 30 deer, all with 7mm mag, same rounds. http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0005330 how much shot to kill an eagle? this study was done in 81, it varied from 10 to 156 # 4 shot, and the one that got 156 shot lived 125 days,,,, so it varies, but in the wild these birds would not have been able to hunt and probably all would have starved much sooner. http://huntingwithnonlead.org/PDFs_Main/Bald%20eagle%20lead%20dosing%20study.pdf a simple google search of lead and eagle poisoning will turn up a huge amount if info.

Padre, yes, we can have opinions, I respect that, and of course I am passionate about this, because I think it is important. I was a CO for a number of years in TX, and taught for almost 20 in NY. I realize with some of these posts , for fun or whatever, ego maybe, but it doesn't matter,,, some people like to joke or push buttons, it really doesn't matter. I would get much more support and congratulations or thanks if I talked to the Humane Society or Audubon Society or some non-hunting organizations,(there are people in those that do hunt), but mostly I would be preaching to the choir. That you said you might want to try these bullets out,,,, that is wonderful, I believe you will be very happy with them. They were not developed for environmental reasons, they were developed(and have been improved), because they penetrate better, and are more accurate(usually). But you decide. I have never reloaded, but a few years ago, I gave a gentleman a few rounds to try. I think he has been on the forum, anyway, he said they shot as well as his best hand loads. Did he switch? I don't know, but he did try them. I can't ask for anymore than if people are interested(I don't try to force anyone to do anything), that they look objectively at the science, and try them out. If you like to shoot, really shoot, you probably won't be buying the cheap crap ammo anyway, the copper is about the same as premium lead ammo. Padre, please send me an email if you want, I was out in western NY a month ago, and no telling when I might be back out that way.([email protected]) If you try some out, for a 30-06, 5 - 1 gallon jugs will barely stop the copper at 100yds, 3 jugs for a cheap corelokt. But your grouping usually will be much better on targets.

I did hope Mr. Bowguy was joking a bit,,,, it is pretty funny. And that someone would get on Curmudgeon's case when no one got on the bowman's case is also funny. But I'll let the invitation stand, you don't need to ask me to shoot with you, but if you do, I'll borrow a pick-up and leave my Prius with the Bernie bumper sticker home if that will make you feel better.

Is there anyone on this forum that would allow me to come out and shoot with them? I am near Fleischmanns, but would be willing to try to bring some rounds of what you are shooting and shoot with you. I use a 30.06, but have and can possibly get some other rounds if you tell me what you shoot. Maybe you can try them out this season if you like them, and let me know how it works out. At least 100yds would be ideal but less is doable. you can email me directly at [email protected] if you prefer.

This is a short easy read, they talk about lead in ammo and in other sources poisoning the condors. Would hunters here voluntarily switch to copper if we had condors in NY? http://archive.azcentral.com/news/arizona/articles/20140118condors-fatal-lead-poisoning.html So many hunters I talk to mention the ban on waterfowl hunting, and that it is no big deal. But at the time, it was a big deal, and was fought with law suits and the same anti hunting propaganda,,,, but we, most of us have accepted it and it is not such a big deal.

lost the image,

If you want to read the science, you can read this summary of quite a few studies. http://www.scientifi...ammunition-ban/ Hunter butchered game is much cleaner(leadwise)than commercially processed venison, but it still may contain lead. This study, not hypothetical, real hunters, real deer, real bullets. study:http://huntingwithno... in Venison.pdf Results. Lead was ultimately detected in 30 of 199 commercially processed samples, a prevalence of 15% (Table 1). The mean lead concentration found among those pantry samples positive for lead was 15.9 mg/kg ± 32.5 std. dev. The mean lead concentration found among all pantry samples was 2.4 mg/kg ± 13.8 std. dev. Lead was detected in 8 of 98 hunter samples, a prevalence of 8%. Seven of the eight positives were from ground meat; one was from a whole cut. The mean lead concentration found among those hunter samples positive for lead was 21.8 mg/kg ± 67.1 std. dev. The mean lead concentration found among all hunter samples was 1.8 mg/kg ± 19.8 std. dev. I think this was in an earlier post, but do you really think you could find all this lead? a deer shot in the chest.