Lead ban in Ca.
- Thread starter Abndoc
- Start date
Updated info
I've extracted information I received about the DFG hearings that were held this morning. Thanks to my friend Tony for getting this to me:
This morning's agenda item on the proposal to ban lead ammunition for hunting purposes in certain hunting zones in California has been covered, and the Commission has now moved on to other business after making some requests of DFG Staff.
DFG staff is being asked, among other things, to provide information regarding the following:
1) Factual information on the availability and cost impact of the
proposed ban as far as fixed ammunition is concerned.
Commission wants data on supply availability, number of
manufacturers, etc.
2) Factual information on enforcement cost impact. This may
include hunter education efforts, as well as bilingual materials
so as to properly notify those farm and ranch personnel
currently involved in varmint and pig control efforts.
3) Additional, if any, factual evidence on lead ammunition
linkage to condor fatalities by ingestion (One apparently
"pro-ban" advocate challenged the "anti-ban" side to
come up with alternative sources of lead that could be
ingested by condors. Apparently he knows nothing about
tire balancing.).
A current "whip count" seems to indicate that at least 3 Commission members favor, or are leaning towards at this time, the limited ban proposal. Substantiated information towards showing that a)non-lead hunting ammunition will be of more limited availability and of substantially higher price; b) that there are other sources of lead in the environment that condors are capable of ingesting; and c) DFG staff is "underestimating" the costs of enforcement on this one could have a substantial effect on the Commission towards their final vote on the matter, currently scheduled in April of 2007.
I've extracted information I received about the DFG hearings that were held this morning. Thanks to my friend Tony for getting this to me:
This morning's agenda item on the proposal to ban lead ammunition for hunting purposes in certain hunting zones in California has been covered, and the Commission has now moved on to other business after making some requests of DFG Staff.
DFG staff is being asked, among other things, to provide information regarding the following:
1) Factual information on the availability and cost impact of the
proposed ban as far as fixed ammunition is concerned.
Commission wants data on supply availability, number of
manufacturers, etc.
2) Factual information on enforcement cost impact. This may
include hunter education efforts, as well as bilingual materials
so as to properly notify those farm and ranch personnel
currently involved in varmint and pig control efforts.
3) Additional, if any, factual evidence on lead ammunition
linkage to condor fatalities by ingestion (One apparently
"pro-ban" advocate challenged the "anti-ban" side to
come up with alternative sources of lead that could be
ingested by condors. Apparently he knows nothing about
tire balancing.).
A current "whip count" seems to indicate that at least 3 Commission members favor, or are leaning towards at this time, the limited ban proposal. Substantiated information towards showing that a)non-lead hunting ammunition will be of more limited availability and of substantially higher price; b) that there are other sources of lead in the environment that condors are capable of ingesting; and c) DFG staff is "underestimating" the costs of enforcement on this one could have a substantial effect on the Commission towards their final vote on the matter, currently scheduled in April of 2007.
Sounds like the committee is on the right track.
Personally, I have no problem paying the extra dough for steel, silver, or copper bullets (for hunting only), provided that it ACTUALLY helps the condor population.
However, like the committee, I question whether the condor's lead poisoning problem can actually be traced back to lead bullets. It seems to me that if there's a lead pollution problem in an area, it is most likely due to some sort of industrial pollution in that area. Otherwise, why are birds here in Tennessee not having the same problem? We hunt a lot down here, too.
If they can prove that banning lead bullets will actually fix the condor problem, then let's all switch to non-lead (it won't be that much more money per round, and it'll only be required while actually out hunting). But, I seriously doubt that they can prove that the condors are getting lead poisoning from bullets. It's gotta be some other source...
Personally, I have no problem paying the extra dough for steel, silver, or copper bullets (for hunting only), provided that it ACTUALLY helps the condor population.
However, like the committee, I question whether the condor's lead poisoning problem can actually be traced back to lead bullets. It seems to me that if there's a lead pollution problem in an area, it is most likely due to some sort of industrial pollution in that area. Otherwise, why are birds here in Tennessee not having the same problem? We hunt a lot down here, too.
If they can prove that banning lead bullets will actually fix the condor problem, then let's all switch to non-lead (it won't be that much more money per round, and it'll only be required while actually out hunting). But, I seriously doubt that they can prove that the condors are getting lead poisoning from bullets. It's gotta be some other source...
CobrayCommando
Moderator
I'd like to see proof that part of the reason condors are dying off is because they pick lead bullets out of carcasses.
Like Samurai, I smell BS.
Like Samurai, I smell BS.
for Samurai
"...Sounds like the committee is on the right track.
Personally, I have no problem paying the extra dough for steel, silver, or copper bullets (for hunting only), provided that it ACTUALLY helps the condor population..."
The committee is on the wrong track because condor mortality is more probably linked to garbage ingestion and negative interactions with irreplaceable infrastructure (power lines) than with lead ammunition consumption.
So-called studies purporting to link ammunition lead to those fragments found in condors use an isotopic measurement technique discontinued by the FBI in 2005 over its inability to distinguish lead source batches.
Anyone can currently purchase "non-lead" bullets, but at 300% markup, should their consciences bother them sufficiently. But the 2003 Condor Recovery Working Document notes that copper is a metal of concern as well, just waiting for further study by NRDC et al. Banning lead is just a first step towards banning bullets in general, and NRDC et al knows it.
Remember, condor mortality related to garbage ingestion is due to internal laceration by sharp objects (wire, metal fragments, glass, etc). So the Barnes Triple Shock has just as much potential to lacerate and kill condors ingesting bullet fragments as when condors ingest trash, or allegedly ingest lead bullet fragments (Current causes of mortality since 1989 claim that lead ingestion is linked to about 40% of total condor fatalities in the wild. Other fatality causes include interaction with the power towers and the garbage ingestion.)
"...However, like the committee, I question whether the condor's lead poisoning problem can actually be traced back to lead bullets. It seems to me that if there's a lead pollution problem in an area, it is most likely due to some sort of industrial pollution in that area. Otherwise, why are birds here in Tennessee not having the same problem? We hunt a lot down here, too...."
Answer: Because there are different target species in the Tennessee flyway areas than in California. In the Midwest and Western Appalachian migratory routes, the target species will be bald eagles, ospreys, and any other raptors that will consume carrion left from hunting activities (gut piles and wounded cripples).
Plumbism mortality near non-industrial waterways is tracked by US Fish and Wildlife, and there is already a reporting program that links a number of target bird species group deaths to lead ingestion in other parts of the country. In reality, it's just a matter of time for another case to get on the radar screen of hunters who are otherwise distracted from the regulatory tactics of the antigun/antihunting movement. That's why you need GRASSROOTS NRA and Firearms activists, willing to follow this issue until death.
"...If they can prove that banning lead bullets will actually fix the condor problem, then let's all switch to non-lead (it won't be that much more money per round, and it'll only be required while actually out hunting). But, I seriously doubt that they can prove that the condors are getting lead poisoning from bullets. It's gotta be some other source..."...
Answer: Barnes bullets cost 150-200% more to buy from a reloading standpoint than comparable Sierra, Hornaday, and Nosler loads. Prices found at Cabelas.com show that one pays $10 or so more per box of 50 Triple shocks, any of a group of common calibers, than what one would pay for a box of 100 Sierra's of the same caliber and bullet weight. Fixed ammo was estimated by the Condor Recovery Team to cost about $2.00 to $2.50 per bullet, when loaded with a Barnes projectile. Add a ban, and that price is going to go up just like prices of gasoline do when supply is inhibited by a refinery outage.
Hunters uniformly zero their rifles with the ammo they hunt with; otherwise there isn't a point to zero it in the first place. If they are like me, I blow 100 practice loads throughout the year to finally use 1-3 rounds during the hunt.
The ban would thus effectively double the price of the ammunition just for a deer hunter. Pig hunters and coyote varminters would see even higher price impacts, given that they tend to use more ammo per hunt than deer hunters do.
And we all know how price sensitive hunters and varmint shooters tend to be. We are thus fighting a ban that would otherwise tend to drive another tier of hunter/shooter/gun owners out of the hobby, due to cost considerations.
As for proof of lead, right now NRDC et al has submitted 7 studies purporting that lead ammo is the cause of condor deaths. Currently, NRA, SAAMI, NSSF, and the manufacturers have submitted zero documents debunking these studies, nor have they submitted alternative studies showing that the sources of lead are industrial in nature.
"...Sounds like the committee is on the right track.
Personally, I have no problem paying the extra dough for steel, silver, or copper bullets (for hunting only), provided that it ACTUALLY helps the condor population..."
The committee is on the wrong track because condor mortality is more probably linked to garbage ingestion and negative interactions with irreplaceable infrastructure (power lines) than with lead ammunition consumption.
So-called studies purporting to link ammunition lead to those fragments found in condors use an isotopic measurement technique discontinued by the FBI in 2005 over its inability to distinguish lead source batches.
Anyone can currently purchase "non-lead" bullets, but at 300% markup, should their consciences bother them sufficiently. But the 2003 Condor Recovery Working Document notes that copper is a metal of concern as well, just waiting for further study by NRDC et al. Banning lead is just a first step towards banning bullets in general, and NRDC et al knows it.
Remember, condor mortality related to garbage ingestion is due to internal laceration by sharp objects (wire, metal fragments, glass, etc). So the Barnes Triple Shock has just as much potential to lacerate and kill condors ingesting bullet fragments as when condors ingest trash, or allegedly ingest lead bullet fragments (Current causes of mortality since 1989 claim that lead ingestion is linked to about 40% of total condor fatalities in the wild. Other fatality causes include interaction with the power towers and the garbage ingestion.)
"...However, like the committee, I question whether the condor's lead poisoning problem can actually be traced back to lead bullets. It seems to me that if there's a lead pollution problem in an area, it is most likely due to some sort of industrial pollution in that area. Otherwise, why are birds here in Tennessee not having the same problem? We hunt a lot down here, too...."
Answer: Because there are different target species in the Tennessee flyway areas than in California. In the Midwest and Western Appalachian migratory routes, the target species will be bald eagles, ospreys, and any other raptors that will consume carrion left from hunting activities (gut piles and wounded cripples).
Plumbism mortality near non-industrial waterways is tracked by US Fish and Wildlife, and there is already a reporting program that links a number of target bird species group deaths to lead ingestion in other parts of the country. In reality, it's just a matter of time for another case to get on the radar screen of hunters who are otherwise distracted from the regulatory tactics of the antigun/antihunting movement. That's why you need GRASSROOTS NRA and Firearms activists, willing to follow this issue until death.
"...If they can prove that banning lead bullets will actually fix the condor problem, then let's all switch to non-lead (it won't be that much more money per round, and it'll only be required while actually out hunting). But, I seriously doubt that they can prove that the condors are getting lead poisoning from bullets. It's gotta be some other source..."...
Answer: Barnes bullets cost 150-200% more to buy from a reloading standpoint than comparable Sierra, Hornaday, and Nosler loads. Prices found at Cabelas.com show that one pays $10 or so more per box of 50 Triple shocks, any of a group of common calibers, than what one would pay for a box of 100 Sierra's of the same caliber and bullet weight. Fixed ammo was estimated by the Condor Recovery Team to cost about $2.00 to $2.50 per bullet, when loaded with a Barnes projectile. Add a ban, and that price is going to go up just like prices of gasoline do when supply is inhibited by a refinery outage.
Hunters uniformly zero their rifles with the ammo they hunt with; otherwise there isn't a point to zero it in the first place. If they are like me, I blow 100 practice loads throughout the year to finally use 1-3 rounds during the hunt.
The ban would thus effectively double the price of the ammunition just for a deer hunter. Pig hunters and coyote varminters would see even higher price impacts, given that they tend to use more ammo per hunt than deer hunters do.
And we all know how price sensitive hunters and varmint shooters tend to be. We are thus fighting a ban that would otherwise tend to drive another tier of hunter/shooter/gun owners out of the hobby, due to cost considerations.
As for proof of lead, right now NRDC et al has submitted 7 studies purporting that lead ammo is the cause of condor deaths. Currently, NRA, SAAMI, NSSF, and the manufacturers have submitted zero documents debunking these studies, nor have they submitted alternative studies showing that the sources of lead are industrial in nature.
This just in:
This came to me from the NRA Members' Council email list today:
The Los Angeles Daily News is reporting that a spokesperson for Fort Tejon has announced that the ranch will ban lead ammo for hunting purposes as of 1-1-2008.
Fort Tejon has long been a popular private location deer, pig, and upland game hunting.
It is not known at this time if Fort Tejon only means rifle ammunition, or intends to include upland game loads as well.
In a kind of "par for the course" comment from Andrew Miller of the Center for Biological Diversity (One of the plaintiffs currently suing the CA Fish and Game Commission over the lead bullet issue), Miller expressed appreciation for the change while at the same time taking a "pot-shot" at plans by Fort Tejon for construction of an industrial development smack dab in the middle of critical condor habitat.
Perhaps if Fort Tejon is allowed to build lots and lots of power lines, tire balancing centers, Coca-Cola bottling operations, and fencing extruders, perhaps the condor "problem" will go the way of the dodo bird by its lonesome. Otherwise, this "turn of events" can only be considered a blow at efforts to halt the current proposal to ban lead ammunition. Stay tuned.
Link at:
http://www.dailynews.com/ci_5357572
This came to me from the NRA Members' Council email list today:
The Los Angeles Daily News is reporting that a spokesperson for Fort Tejon has announced that the ranch will ban lead ammo for hunting purposes as of 1-1-2008.
Fort Tejon has long been a popular private location deer, pig, and upland game hunting.
It is not known at this time if Fort Tejon only means rifle ammunition, or intends to include upland game loads as well.
In a kind of "par for the course" comment from Andrew Miller of the Center for Biological Diversity (One of the plaintiffs currently suing the CA Fish and Game Commission over the lead bullet issue), Miller expressed appreciation for the change while at the same time taking a "pot-shot" at plans by Fort Tejon for construction of an industrial development smack dab in the middle of critical condor habitat.
Perhaps if Fort Tejon is allowed to build lots and lots of power lines, tire balancing centers, Coca-Cola bottling operations, and fencing extruders, perhaps the condor "problem" will go the way of the dodo bird by its lonesome. Otherwise, this "turn of events" can only be considered a blow at efforts to halt the current proposal to ban lead ammunition. Stay tuned.
Link at:
http://www.dailynews.com/ci_5357572
If condors are dying from lead ingestion due to bullets and shot, why don't turkey vultures have the same problem? They feed from the same sources.
Anybody know how many condors are killed while eating road kill? This lead ban is just another way to restrict gunowners.
Thanks for the info, Don. Good post.
Anybody know how many condors are killed while eating road kill? This lead ban is just another way to restrict gunowners.
Thanks for the info, Don. Good post.