lead in ammunition

[Doewhacker]

You would be wrong on that Doewhacker.

 

 

 

No I'm not. When have you killed game in the last couple of years? He made a comment about using lead alternatives to hunt with not target practice with, come on keep up Rob.

 

 

My advice to vly and others is to offer the info and leave the thread because all of these internet scientist will do nothing but argue no matter what. A good number of those same guys don't get off the couch long enough to worry about poisoning anything with lead.

[Doewhacker]

 

 

 

 

, and usually make my own cigarettes, cost, maybe $30 a week.

 

 

Expensive habit no matter how you slice it, $15-1600 a year on that is crazy. just think you could buy your own plot of land with what you spend on things that will cause health issues down the road costing you more money.

[EspressoBuzz]

If I recall the "science" for a long time was doctored by the cigarette companies to show no ill effects from smoking. In fact in the late 40's and early 50's some "doctors" even touted the benefits of smoking....

 

To everything (spin, spin, spin)
There is a season (spin, spin, spin)
And a time to every purpose, under heaven...

[DirtTime]

No deer or turkey since getting back into hunting the past few years. 7 or 8 squirrels last winter with the shotgun using old fashioned Winchester Super Sport #8's and Hevi Game Lead Shot from Heavy Shot in #6.

 

 

[Four Season Whitetail's]

Rob smokes and drinks beer he doesn't sip lattes get it right!

 

I have never seen him post about shooting anything actually so I think a box of copper slugs could last him a life time.  

Kinda like one of the bird lovers that posts on this site/Topic!

[airedale]

EspressoBuzz

"If I recall the "science" for a long time was doctored by the cigarette companies to show no ill effects from smoking. In fact in the late 40's and early 50's some "doctors" even touted the benefits of smoking.."

===========================================

Comparing traditional hunting bullets to cigarettes is not even a remotely comparable analogy. Smokers have casualties by the tens of thousands, diseases like emphysema, lung, throat, mouth cancer, high blood pressure, COPD, heart, stroke etc etc. Regardless what any promoter of smoking would say it is clear to even a moron that smoking can be the cause severe health problems.and death.

 

As for traditional jacketed lead based ammo no one can come up with a single unequivocal proven case of significant lead poisoning on humans who have been eating millions of tons game meat taken with that traditional ammo for well over a century. A "BIG" difference in my opinion.

 

Al

Edited July 12, 2016 by airedale

[virgil]

Bowguy, the point is that there is a difference between a theory and a scientifically proven fact.  Yes, theories are only theories-  until they have been tested.  Scientific studies are done based on theories.  A properly performed study will either prove or disprove a theory.  When a large number of studies have been completed and found similar results, and if these studies are peer-reviewed and accepted, a theory has been proven.  It is at this point that the only option for those who prefer to remain ignorant is to deny science. 

Yes, there have been studies done by 'scientists' who are on someone's payroll or who have an agenda.  These studies do not pass the 'peer-reviewed' process and never get published in respected scientific journals.  They will usually only be used as propaganda by the companies that funded the study.

[Bowguy 1]

Virgil the propaganda is my point. How do we know the studies are correct? Again my point bout the fisherman split shot? The tests cannot be complete without all the facts. Forget the Hawks n Eagles im referring to the elevated lead blood levels in humans. And as I stated all Itd take is breaking the accuracy records to show the lead is not necessary. Seems an easy task no?

Now as an electrician Id know the price of copper fluctuates pretty wildly compared to lead. So what about the cost difference?

It's all gotta be considered

[jjb4900]

how about we all get blood tests at the end of the year after we eat all our lead shot game and see what the numbers are? I know it would be a small sample, but it would be fun, maybe prizes for the highest and lowest levels.

[Curmudgeon]

This article is from the current issue of The Wildlife Professional, the journal of The Wildlife Society. It was written by former Chief NYS Wildlife Biologist Gordon Batcheller and addresses much of what has been discussed here.

 

Alternative Hunting Ammunitions.pdf

[airedale]

Well good for Gordon, if he want to use Barnes bullets I have no problem with that. I will continue to use my Nosler, Sierra, Speer, Hornady and yes I even have quite a few Barnes bullets and I am just as confident as he is when he serves up his special meatballs. When I serve any of my Venison to anyone family included,  it is completely safe because it was taken care of properly.

 

Al

Edited July 12, 2016 by airedale

[airedale]

This is what happens when sportsmen and shooters let this anti lead bullshit get traction, A TOTAL BAN ON TRADITIONAL AMMUNITION!!!

The California Fish and Game Commission are implanting the law in three stages:

1. On July 1, 2015, no lead ammo may be used to hunt in state run wildlife areas and ecological reserves.
2. On July 1, 2016, no lead ammunition can be used when hunting with a shotgun for upland game birds, furbearing mammals, and non-game mammals and birds.
3. A total ban on hunting with lead ammo goes into effect on July 1, 2019

4. The NSSF surveyed California hunters after AB 711 passed and found that nearly 40 percent said they will either have to stop or severely reduce their hunting due to the much higher costs of non-lead ammunition. 

   This goes for 22 rimfire ammo also, probably the most widely used ammo of all. So far the best they come up with for 22 rimfire is a powdered copper X poly pressed bullet that shoots like crap and costs 10.99 for fifty. And “widely available?” Forget that. The Fish and Wildlife Service has an approved list of non-lead ammunition that has less than 40 manufacturers on it. Further, due to local restrictions in densely and highly populated Los Angeles, Oakland, Sacramento and San Francisco, ordering ammo by mail is nearly impossible—if not all together forbidden.

   The NSSF report says the ban could lead to a loss of $20 million in revenue for the state.

Al

[vlywaterman]

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.  

[DirtTime]

Posted Today, 01:58 PM

Doewhacker, on 12 Jul 2016 - 09:46 AM, said:

Rob smokes and drinks beer he doesn't sip lattes get it right!

 

I have never seen him post about shooting anything actually so I think a box of copper slugs could last him a life time.  

Kinda like one of the bird lovers that posts on this site/Topic!

 

 

Care to explain this FSW? Not trying to be nasty, but not sure what you meant by:

Kinda like one of the bird lovers that posts on this site/Topic!

 

[Rattler]

It's hard for many hunters to believe the anti-lead campaign isn't just another obstacle foisted upon them by authorities, who want to make it so cumbersome and expensive to own a firearm for hunting, or anything else, that it's not worth the bother, or possible incarceration.

 

There are plenty of research papers that have been published already that virtually prove this is happening.

 

Any California firearm hunter will swear it's true as well.

 

[Four Season Whitetail's]

 

 

Care to explain this FSW? Not trying to be nasty, but not sure what you meant by:

 

He accuses you of not being a hunter because of not talking about it and not showing pic's and such yet he buddies up to the Curmudgeon who never does either and always talks more like a spokesmen for the anti's than speaking like a hunter.

[DirtTime]

He accuses you of not being a hunter because of not talking about it and not showing pic's and such yet he buddies up to the Curmudgeon who never does either and always talks more like a spokesmen for the anti's than speaking like a hunter.

Ah. Got ya.

I have gotten to the point where I believe people will think, perceive, and make conclusions based on, well, nothing. On some topics, that includes myself.

I do not have a need or want to post every detail of my hunts. I have posted a few things in the live from the woods. But, when I am hunting, the last thing on my mind is my cell phone and posting to a web site. My focus is on hunting. So if people want to hold that against me, so be it.

 

As for the anti's in here............. Like I said in another thread, even a staff member here said we have them. They are parasites! Leeches! They either can't afford their own site to spew the propaganda, or they just want to disrupt every pro hunting site they can gain access too.

 

I bet these same people support the "Safe Act" ( otherwise known as a direct violation of the 2nd Amendment ).

[Doewhacker]

Ah. Got ya.

I have gotten to the point where I believe people will think, perceive, and make conclusions based on, well, nothing. On some topics, that includes myself.

I do not have a need or want to post every detail of my hunts. I have posted a few things in the live from the woods. But, when I am hunting, the last thing on my mind is my cell phone and posting to a web site. My focus is on hunting. So if people want to hold that against me, so be it.

 

As for the anti's in here............. Like I said in another thread, even a staff member here said we have them. They are parasites! Leeches! They either can't afford their own site to spew the propaganda, or they just want to disrupt every pro hunting site they can gain access too.

 

I bet these same people support the "Safe Act" ( otherwise known as a direct violation of the 2nd Amendment ).

 

haha you had to repost your response to FSW who apparently you think speaks on my behalf. This has nothing to do with lead but its time for you to hear it.

 

You wouldn't have to worry about burning through copper slugs because you don't kill any game to speak of. I do find it comical when you post excuses during season as to why you aren't hunting (weather ect), and when you give input on bow hunting equipment and methods when the truth is you don't even own a bow. Or when you give advice on big woods hunting when the truth is you don't venture far from camp. Or when you whine about having to hunt state land but never bother to go out and secure private land access in the same area I have zero issue getting access.

 

Barely hunting still makes you a hunter though.

[DirtTime]

haha you had to repost your response to FSW who apparently you think speaks on my behalf. This has nothing to do with lead but its time for you to hear it.

 

You wouldn't have to worry about burning through copper slugs because you don't kill any game to speak of. I do find it comical when you post excuses during season as to why you aren't hunting (weather ect), and when you give input on bow hunting equipment and methods when the truth is you don't even own a bow. Or when you give advice on big woods hunting when the truth is you don't venture far from camp. Or when you whine about having to hunt state land but never bother to go out and secure private land access in the same area I have zero issue getting access.

 

Barely hunting still makes you a hunter though.

 

The other guy you used to spar with is gone. Don't worry, time will heal your broken heart Doewhacker. Chin up buddy! 

[Rattler]

Obama's US Fish & Wildlife agency seems to have no problem with dead Bald Eagles or Golden Eagles, as long as they don't die from lead ammo.

 

http://www.thefederalistpapers.org/us/look-which-national-symbol-obama-wants-to-eliminate-now

[EspressoBuzz]

Using urban pigeons to monitor lead pollution

http://universityofcalifornia.edu/news/using-urban-pigeons-monitor-lead-pollution

[vlywaterman]

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

 

[Four Season Whitetail's]

1 hour ago, vlywaterman said:

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

 

That Damn Nasty Rain!

[airedale]

From National Shooting Sorts Foundation

 

We all know that hunters have been using traditional ammunition with lead components for hundreds of years. It is a staple in every hunter’s pickup truck and cabin. Game harvested with such ammunition has been safely consumed by humans for hundreds of years and is a source of healthy, low-fat food. Naturally, hunters would be concerned about any claim that game harvested with traditional ammunition posed a health risk, even when the claim is unwarranted. A Centers for Disease Control (CDC) study of blood lead levels in North Dakota hunters validates what hunters have always known: consuming game harvested with traditional ammunition containing lead does not pose a human health risk. The baseless claim that caused concern about consuming venison harvested with lead ammunition was born out of the anti-hunting movement. 

 

The story started when a dermatologist with ties to the Peregrine Fund -- an organization dedicated to eliminating the use of lead ammunition for hunting -- claimed to have collected packages of venison from food banks that contained lead fragments. Out of fear and an overabundance of caution, North Dakota health officials (who never conducted their own study) accepted the dermatologist’s findings and ordered all food banks to discard their venison. The CDC study was prompted because of the unscientific “study” conducted by the dermatologist, to determine if hunting with lead ammunition caused a health risk in humans. If the unscientific allegations of an individual who serves on the board of directors of a politically driven group intent on banning lead ammunition could start all this, you can be assured that other antihunting organizations will try to manipulate the data from the CDC study and scare people into thinking it is unsafe to eat game taken with traditional ammunition.

 

To our point, the Humane Society of the United States, an anti-hunting group and not the organization that runs your local animal shelter, came out in favor of banning all lead ammunition. This is as unsurprising as it is baseless. Common sense and the CDC science based study demonstrate that this issue is not about ammunition. It’s about banning hunting. 

 

It’s important that all hunters and their families know this and other key facts from the study.

• The average lead level of the hunters tested was actually lower than the blood lead level of the average American, including non-hunters. • The average lead level of children in the study was only .88 micrograms per deciliter of blood; the CDC’s level of concern for lead in children is 10 -- more than 10 times the amount found! • The difference between participants who ate wild game harvested with traditional ammunition and non-hunters was only .3 micrograms -- a clinically insignificant number.

 

We believe strongly that hunters should take this opportunity to educate other hunters about the CDC study and the facts about consuming game harvested with traditional ammunition, with a reminder to properly field dress and butcher their game. Regardless of the findings of any study, it is always a good idea to remove and properly discard all shot-damaged meat before processing or cooking. Hunters should also point out the CDC study to local food pantries and organizations that feed the homeless with meat generously donated by hunters so that this valuable food source for needy persons is not wasted out of an overabundance of caution, misinformation or baseless fears. If you know a hunter or anyone who enjoys the pleasure of a venison meal, we urge you to forward this information to them in the spirit of spreading accurate information about eating venison taken with traditional ammunition.

 

 

[vlywaterman]

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?