Non Lead Bullets For Hunting?

[Mr VJP]

I was at a Sportsman show yesterday and there was a nice fellow there with a display about using non lead bullets for hunting.  He was a guy concerned about the environment and claimed some eagles may have died from lead poisoning, even though they can't be sure it was from bullets ingested.  We talked a lot about California and how their program was handled all wrong.

 

He claimed he wasn't trying to push any lead ammo ban in NY, but thought making hunters aware of it might get us to stop using lead ammo ourselves.

 

I pointed out the cost of copper ammo was a problem for me, as well as the fact I have enough lead ammo to last the rest of my life.  I also mentioned small game hunters use only lead shot and .22 LR rounds in the woods as well.

 

He thanked me for my input by giving me 3 Federal Premium 165 gr copper bullet .30-06 cartridges to test against my current Federal Premium 165 gr Jacketed .30-06 cartridges.  I wanted to see if they would shoot the same groups as my current loads do.  I'll be e-mailing him with the results and pictures too.

 

I'm not against non lead ammo, but as I told him, I don't want to see a law that bans my current stuff, and any costs to change over to non lead stuff should not be a burden for hunters.  If the state wants this change, they better be willing to pick up the expense of it.

 

Interesting question for all hunters:

 

If you could trade 2 boxes of your old hunting rifle ammo for 1 box of Premium copper rifle ammo at no cost to you, would you be willing to do it?  This was an idea suggested to help solve the problem of all that lead ammo currently in hunter's inventory.

 

[Lawdwaz]

I could happily hunt with Barnes bullets for my remaining days. As far as swapping; no thank you.

[Doc]

Well, here's the problem. I have spent considerable time and money developing loads that I now know will perform and group well. I also have a large inventory of these same components waiting to be loaded up. I really don't want to change all of that based on some rare theoretical damage that lead bullets may be causing among a few eagles. I do get a bit tired with knee-jerk reactions every time someone suspects that something might be happening somewhere to some unknown quantity of some isolated species for no truly understood cause. I want to see far more proof that the materials really are a problem before I start reacting.

[Mustang51js]

Isn't the point of using lead for the mushroom effect. Doesn't solid copper go right through the animal and leave a small exit wound and a lot of lost animals

[papabear]

I spent a lot of money on my ammo and if i did that trad I would lose a grate deal of money and then buying new ammo would be way more then were spending on it now  not a good trad 

[adkbuck]

Unfortunately the attempts to ban lead bullets are not based on good science: http://www.huntfortruth.org/myths/

 

I have nothing against using copper for bullets as long as it is not imposed on me by a bunch of politicians using politically contaminated science.

 

Copper, by the way also has its own toxicity problems, although rarely discussed:   http://www.arltma.com/Articles/CopperToxDoc.htm

[bubba]

Nope for all the above reasons

[pewlodar]

I don't have a problem banning lead bullets. Any one have extra split shot, was hoping to do some fishing this afternoon.

Edited September 1, 2014 by pewlodar

[Mr VJP]

Isn't the point of using lead for the mushroom effect. Doesn't solid copper go right through the animal and leave a small exit wound and a lot of lost animals

 

 

The solid copper bullets are designed to retain most of their original weight when shot into an animal, but they have cuts in the front of them to allow for a very good mushroom that looks like a flower petal.  They perform very well on game.  But they are expensive.  I am assuming they also shoot as accurately, but I intend to test them and see for myself.

 

I agree this is not proven science as far as eagles and lead is concerned, and I did tell him that.  I also mentioned that lead was banned in the western states, because it was suspected of killing birds, but pointed out the greenies are promoting wind mills for power, which is PROVEN to be a bird killer, along with the high temperature solar energy arrays they also promote.

 

I think the swap idea of 2 old ammo boxes for 1 new premium ammo box would be a good choice for some folks who have old, nothing special, possibly not so accurate, or not so well done reloads.   Especially if they are looking to upgrade their ammo for their future hunting.  A lot of old ammo is only worth about half of what loads like Federal Premium copper loads are worth anyway.  But I told him this program would only succeed if hunters bought into the idea and it was adopted voluntarily over many years.

 

If ammo makers started getting demand for a lot more lead free bullets, they could tool up their production for many more of these rounds and the prices would come down, due to overhead being spread over many more units.  They would also have incentives to look into other non lead metals like Bismuth-Tin alloys that would be even less costly.

 

I also see where a lot of new jobs could be created in an industry designed to reclaim the lead, copper and brass from traded in ammo.  The powder could even be recycled. Even the distribution logistics for supplying the new non lead ammo while taking back the old stuff would create jobs.  And a lot of old ammo could be used on ranges that are already filled with lead bullets, for training programs for groups like the Boy Scouts or maybe even Police.

 

Getting lead ammo out of the field is a worthy goal, but any government mandated ban is going to be a problem.  Looking back on the steel shot laws for waterfowl and the negative impact it had on the sport, as well as considering all of the lead from small game hunters in the field, and the point made above about split shot and weights for fishing, I think this is a problem that has to be solved by sportsman on their own, and not mandated at all by any agency of government.

 

I believe getting a lot of the lead out of the woods and waters would be great.  I also feel the copper bullets are a much better bullet for deer hunting and would love to use them exclusively, (but I'm not schooled on any of their toxicity if they have some) however, I think getting 100% of the lead out of the filed is a fantasy and the sportsman should not be the one to suffer from the brunt of a heavy handed government mandate to make that happen.

[ATbuckhunter]

I actually shoot copper Barnes TSX bullets for big game and have been for the last 5 years. I love these guys and never plan on changing. I hate lead and don't eat anything shot with lead but I respect the fact that people want to use lead in their bullets so I could never support a lead bad for big game. 

[Hock3y24]

Im not sure if I'd swap, I just bought 3 boxes each of hornaday american whitetail in 25.06 and 308( at 17.50 a box) pretty good stuff. Would defiantly consider it if was offered at a reasonable price though.

Edited September 2, 2014 by Hock3y24

[adkbuck]

Time to smell the coffee!  Any proposed ban of lead projectiles for whatever reason is just part of the incremental elimination of hunting.  Lead poses an ingestion hazard primarily when its particle size is extremely small.   There is an inverse relationship between particle size and adsorption by the body.  Lead and many other metals become a problem when their particle size becomes very fine dust as in airborne dust or paint borne fine particles a thousandth of an inch in diameter or smaller.  The fragments associated with bullets striking game are typically much larger and do not pose a threat. 

 

The dangers of lead bullets are greatly exaggerated by the left and our easily convinced "moral superiors".   The most significant study shows the facts.  

 

A study by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in 2008 tested lead levels in the blood of 700 North Dakotans. Most (81percent) had consumed wild game, including venison. Most (62 percent) ate venison at least once a week.

None of the people tested had lead blood levels above the CDC's recommended levels. In fact, the average lead level was below that of the overall U.S. population.

 

No one has ever been documented to have gotten sick from eating game killed with lead bullets.  Not ever. 

 

The fact is,  copper bullets will increase the already high cost of center fire ammunition significantly. For instance the cost of  270 Winchester increases from a typical $20 per 20-round box to $37 per box for Barnes 130 grain spire points.  What bothers me the most is not the cost of ammunition for a hunt but how hunters will practice less with the high cost of ammunition.  If you ask me commercially manufactured ammunition has already gotten prohibitively expensive and is stopping a lot of hunters from practicing with their selected ammunition beyond bench shooting and sight-in.

 

Other facts:  Large slugs and shotgun slugs tend to fragment much less.  Copper rifle slugs fragment less but they too will also fragment.  Their petals break off and they have some fragments ...it can't be helped...its a science known as "fracture mechanics".   As an engineer I can tell you when copper moving over 2000 fps hits something,  some fractures must occur.  Copper yields more than lead but it also fractures and some small fragments will be created although less In number than with lead.

 

Eventually since copper is also known to have toxic effects on humans, after it has been more widely used it will be claimed that even copper projectiles pose a risk.  Copper has been shown to cause cirrhosis of the liver and many other diseases and death in humans.  Copper hull paint has been used for years because it is toxic to marine life. It will then be claimed that copper and most other metals have at least some toxic effects and should not be used in game hunting.  Eventually what this type of leftist political correctness will lead us to is a ban of all hunting using high velocity metallic projectiles because metal fragments are present to some degree in the meat of anything that is shot.   

Edited September 2, 2014 by adkbuck

[mike rossi]

Unfortunately the attempts to ban lead bullets are not based on good science: http://www.huntfortruth.org/myths/

 

I have nothing against using copper for bullets as long as it is not imposed on me by a bunch of politicians using politically contaminated science.

 

Copper, by the way also has its own toxicity problems, although rarely discussed:   http://www.arltma.com/Articles/CopperToxDoc.htm

 

Hunting for the truth is not based on good science.

[Mr VJP]

Hunting for the truth is not based on good science.

 

 

Mike, do you believe the lead ban proponents claims are based on good science?

[Doc]

I love that term, "good science". Who among us is capable of making that determination. It would take a reproduction of all the hours of research not to mention the financial resources that were required to initially come up with research data and conclusions in order to make an accurate determination as to whether all the good principles of statistics and research and logic was used. Now try doing that for the thousands of new studies we are bombarded with each year.

 

Here is the real question that should be asked. How far are you willing to modify your life simply because somebody told you they have conducted a study and determined that some part of your daily actions need to be changed.

 

Yes, sometimes it makes some sense to try to put the odds in your favor by accepting a preponderance of evidence or something that has a kernel of logic associated with the conclusions. Some of these studies have watch-dog organizations to keep researchers on the straight and narrow but usually that is not the case. Most of the time we simply get used to accepting everything that comes our way dressed up in good credentials and assumed good intentions. And it really is not all that rare when subsequent studies come along and come up with completely contradictory  results indicating that the first researchers as high though of as they are, simply didn't come out as infallible as they claim to be..

 

Good science??? I don't know about that, but I do know that at some point, we should try to determine how much we are willing to get steam-rollered under the guise of studies and research.

[fasteddie]

No trade here but thanks anyway ...........

[Culvercreek hunt club]

I could happily hunt with Barnes bullets for my remaining days. As far as swapping; no thank you.

How does the actual ballistis compare to a lead bullet of the same weight? Energy at longer yardage? I know you have had great luck with them

[philoshop]

As far as ballistics go, an object of a specific mass at a specific velocity will have a specific energy at a specific range. It's entirely physics and mathematics. Energy = .5 x mass x velocity squared. Roughly.

What happens to that object during flight depends on a number of variables, most notably the actual physical dimensions. A truckload of feathers fired from a cannon isn't going to go very far before it loses its velocity. No velocity=no energy. A dense object will fly faster for a greater distance. Farther away and still going fast=more energy farther away.

What happens at the end of the flight when the object hits something, terminal ballistics, has to do with the velocity at the moment of impact and the construction of the object. In order for the flying object to do the most damage to whatever it hits, it needs to convert a great deal of its velocity to energy very quickly. This is why bullets are built to expand in diameter, to 'mushroom' when they hit something. The bullet has done its job getting there as quickly as possible and now it has to stop spending energy flying and leave as much as it can at the target.

Lots and lots of other variables for sure, but these are the basics. If an object can be counted on to accurately hit a target with enough velocity, and then to turn that velocity into an appropriate amount of destructive energy, I don't really care what that object is made of. I'd be happy with bullets made from parts of politicians. Then again: not very accurate, will fall apart under the least bit of pressure. can't grasp the concept of 'down range', and will likely veer off on a tangent at the moment of truth. They are, however, exceedingly dense.

[Pygmy]

How does the actual ballistis compare to a lead bullet of the same weight? Energy at longer yardage? I know you have had great luck with them

 Culver...Ballistics with monometal  vs. lead bullets of the same weight is comparable, as long as the ballistic coefficient is similar.

 

One advantage of the monometals is that , due to the fact that they retain most of thier weight, you can shoot a lighter bullet, thus increasing velocity and flattening trajectory and still get good performance on game. 

 

Monometals don't appeal much to the "expend all the energy in the animal" crowd, because more often than not they exit. They DO however wreck a lot of tissue along the way and they kill very well.  I have been loading Barnes X type bullets in all of my hunting rifles for several years now . Before that, I shot mostly Nosler Ballistic tips, which are noted for rapid expansion. The critters I shot with ballistic tips didn't expire any quicker than the ones I have shot with barnes X bullets.

 

Getting back to the subject of this thread, even though I personally like the all copper bullets, I would be absolutely opposed to legislation that banned lead bullets. Just another "feel good" law for the Greenies..

 

 

[Culvercreek hunt club]

Phil, Agree on your explanation but let me throw in a couple varables. to echieve the same mass with a less dense material you need mor of it. Since the caliber of the rifle fixes the diameter that only lease one way, longer projectile. Aerodynamically they do not react the same. cross wind will have a greater influence on the larger profile of the same mass. So that was my question. Given the variables you mention does anyone know of a comparison that was done independently of the bullets out there? (too lazy to google...lol)

Edited September 2, 2014 by Culvercreek hunt club

[Curmudgeon]

I just joined this forum because someone sent me the link to this discussion. I have been using monolithic bullets - mostly Barnes TSX - for over a decade. Performance is excellent. Accuracy is excellent. My family has killed over 30 deer with them.

 

Referring to something as "good science" is a just way to raise doubts about other science. Having read scores of papers on lead ammo, lead levels in scavengers, lead effects on people, lead in meat in venison donation programs, etc, etc. etc., we should not be discussing "good science" but "peer reviewed science". I've been to the NRA's site on lead ammo. It's bunk. 

 

I raised my kids on venison killed with lead. They survived, even thrived. Possibly they had a drop of a few IQ points. My sister says they are closer to normal because of it.

 

Now, I don't let anyone hunt with lead bullets on my property.My grandkids only eat venison killed with copper or gilding metal bullets. Lead is toxic. It fragments - sometimes into hundreds of pieces. Do a web search. Find the images. Look at Xrays of carcasses and gut piles. Scavengers eat those gut piles, lead and all, including eagles and condors. Copper remains intact. Get some ballistic gelatin and try it.

 

As far as the toxicity of lead, a Bald Eagle in PA recently died from lead poisoning with a single air rifle pellet in its gut. It need not be mulitple tiny fragments.

 

I have done the research. I am confident that lead affects scavengers and children. If this makes me a "lefty" a "greenie" I guess I will have to live with that. I've been called worse.

 

 

[Doc]

I guess that's why all of our forefathers who had no choice but to use lead for all those centuries were a bunch of drooling idiots who could barely string words together to form a simple sentence. Thank God the wizards of research are here to save us all.

[Mr VJP]

So, in order for all lead to be removed from the field as a threat, we have to ban bullets, lead shot, pellet gun ammo, split shot, sinkers and anything else using lead that sportsman have always used.  I don't think we want the government to do that.  Gaining a little security, but giving up a lot of Liberty, seems un-American.

 

 

[virgil]

Welcome to the site, Curmudgeon.

[PREDATE]

I would not be pleased to see a lead ban in NY during my lifetime, but this thread did help me find my next muzzleloader bullet. The Knight Bloodline sabots(all brass). I will be giving the slug gun a rest this year