Desk Jockey
WKR
- Joined
- Apr 5, 2015
- Messages
- 5,972
Warning - Mild rant below.
Saw this in some of the media coverage of the Zinke order signing. Among other things he is allowing use of lead ammo on federal lands, along with a bunch of other stuff that is I think is great.
Overtunring the lead ammo ban is good because I tend to think the overall concept of a lead ban creates an avenue for back door banning of recreational firearms usage. There is plenty of discussion by pro gunners about how the anti-2A crowd have tried oblique tactics like banning lead and certain chemical components of primers and powder as a way to reduce the availability and raise the cost of ammo to make shooting more expensive and therefore less popular.
Having said that, I am not a fan of eating lead. I have run into a pellet or two in waterfowl and pheasants I hunt. In the meat, never in a crop by the way.
When it comes to deer, I have been exclusively a bow hunter so I haven't had and issue. I inspect my arrows for blade breakage and cut away meat near the wound channel.
Reading some of the anti zinke coverage I saw this study:
http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/campaigns/get_the_lead_out/pdfs/Cornatzer_et_al_2009.pdf
I was also intrigued by the article from the meateater team below.
A MeatEater’s Case for Getting the Lead Out – MeatEater
I guess I would want to have the option to use lead but see the value of nonlead alternatives to prevent consumption by humans in meat. As far as the 20 millions birds they claim lead exposure kills. I am not sure I am convinced. I am reminded of the story of the estimate 1.3-3.7 billion birds that US house cats eat each year. Even if you think that number is inflated - Do We Really Know That Cats Kill By The Billions? Not So Fast : 13.7: Cosmos And Culture : NPR - it still seems like it is an order of magnitude higher than the top end of the impact being ascribed to environmental lead.
Saw this in some of the media coverage of the Zinke order signing. Among other things he is allowing use of lead ammo on federal lands, along with a bunch of other stuff that is I think is great.
Overtunring the lead ammo ban is good because I tend to think the overall concept of a lead ban creates an avenue for back door banning of recreational firearms usage. There is plenty of discussion by pro gunners about how the anti-2A crowd have tried oblique tactics like banning lead and certain chemical components of primers and powder as a way to reduce the availability and raise the cost of ammo to make shooting more expensive and therefore less popular.
Having said that, I am not a fan of eating lead. I have run into a pellet or two in waterfowl and pheasants I hunt. In the meat, never in a crop by the way.
When it comes to deer, I have been exclusively a bow hunter so I haven't had and issue. I inspect my arrows for blade breakage and cut away meat near the wound channel.
Reading some of the anti zinke coverage I saw this study:
http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/campaigns/get_the_lead_out/pdfs/Cornatzer_et_al_2009.pdf
I was also intrigued by the article from the meateater team below.
A MeatEater’s Case for Getting the Lead Out – MeatEater
I guess I would want to have the option to use lead but see the value of nonlead alternatives to prevent consumption by humans in meat. As far as the 20 millions birds they claim lead exposure kills. I am not sure I am convinced. I am reminded of the story of the estimate 1.3-3.7 billion birds that US house cats eat each year. Even if you think that number is inflated - Do We Really Know That Cats Kill By The Billions? Not So Fast : 13.7: Cosmos And Culture : NPR - it still seems like it is an order of magnitude higher than the top end of the impact being ascribed to environmental lead.