Lead-Free rules coming to Idaho?

[wowzers]

The Nez Perce tribe has been pushing this for a while and this survey was based on one of their previous surveys.

 

[Jesse Jaymes]

What is the down side of non lead ammo?

What is the huge opposition?

 

[North of 60]

A general observation regarding data published by academics and some nonprofits that may apply here:

A fair amount of my work in the job i had before retiring involved consulting for academics wanting to publish based on state-level data, wrangling independent evaluations by universities, and advising on policy at the state level, and some at the national level.

What i observed and battled was academics are commonly biased from whatever premise they are starting from, and they look for (and manipulate) data to support the outcome they want to see happen with policy, or to get published. Decision makers use that information.

It is frightening to me how much influence academics have on policy in this country.

 

[HunterGatherer]

What is the down side of non lead ammo?

What is the huge opposition?

It’s probably better if you just search this site or use an AI to give you the pros and cons. Otherwise, it will completely derail this thread

 

[packgoatguy]

What is the down side of non lead ammo?

What is the huge opposition?

There is no downside to have the option to use lead-free bullets... and if you want to use them, more power to you.

It's when the state forces me to use them by banning all alternatives that I take issue with.

As for the benefits of ammo that contains lead... (like lead covered in a copper jacket... think hornady eldx, eldm, berger eol, vld, Sierra TMK) I would have to mostly defer to smarter folks than I for those details (like @Formidilosus).

But for me, it comes down to having bullets that create larger wound channels at lower impact velocities with smaller calibers... when compared to the alternative lead-free options. Likewise, the highest BC bullets available for hunters contain lead... which means additional drop and wind drift for the lead-free alternatives (all else being equal). In the end, I'm able to do more with less (less recoil mostly) to achieve the same results, and that helps me and my kids be better shooters to begin with.

I'll add that there has been plenty of debate on this in other threads if you are interested (I believe its discussed at length in the "223 for Bear, Elk, Deer" thread and threads considering the efficacy of 6mm and 6.5mm bullet offerings.

 

[HunterGatherer]

There is no downside to have the option to use lead-free bullets... and if you want to use them, more power to you.

It's when the state forces me to use them by banning all alternatives that I take issue with.

I agree with this. I’m a solid copper shooter and the way I hunt, there is no downside. I actually see more downsides to lead. I would like to see non-lead bullet use become more common BUT I think trying to promote its use by mandating it and outlawing lead actually causes way more resistance to people using it. People, myself included, do not like to be told what to do. As soon as you try to tell someone they may not be able to shoot lead, the pushback is enormous.

 

[Andrew12gauge]

Up until this year your bullet had to be solid lead for muzzleloader hunting in Idaho.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[rclouse79]

After going from copper back to lead and finding a load that shoots light out, I would just keep another magazine of copper bullets in my pocket and pay the fine if I got caught.

 

[Jesse Jaymes]

It’s probably better if you just search this site or use an AI to give you the pros and cons. Otherwise, it will completely derail this thread

Semi respectfully....it's not meant to derail. Rough guess is 75% or more of the replies to this thread are folks/hunters crying about a potential mandate. Some have cried foul on the cost of bullets/ammo. Others are making claims to maybe lethality of game birds with non toxic?

I posed the serious question of other than being a cry baby....environmentally....what is the down side?

I am a 40+ year custom handloader. I've shot schitt tons of Barnes TSX. And shit ton of cast lead handgun ammo.

Just because it may seem non traditional, or mandated, or costly...what are the environmental downsides to a lead ban?

 

[mt terry d]

I'm curious to hear you explain the scam. How does IDFG make more money banning lead? What would be the motive's behind possibly banning lead? P.s. I shoot lead projectiles exclusively.

My point was that lead isn't the real issue/problem with out "game management".
That's just another diversion, a distraction.
Gets us all quibbling about minutiae when it's the system, the structure of the MTFWP ( and probably every state F&G) that's the problem/scam.

You probably have a few people within the system that know decisions are made from the top down
and that their first priority is to keep their jobs/expand & grow the system, not to properly manage the resource, but if they speak up they are penalized if not forced out. Dissent is verboten. Forest Service same.
It's government . It's how it works.

 

[packgoatguy]

Semi respectfully....it's not meant to derail. Rough guess is 75% or more of the replies to this thread are folks/hunters crying about a potential mandate. Some have cried foul on the cost of bullets/ammo. Others are making claims to maybe lethality of game birds with non toxic?

I posed the serious question of other than being a cry baby....environmentally....what is the down side?

I am a 40+ year custom handloader. I've shot schitt tons of Barnes TSX. And shit ton of cast lead handgun ammo.

Just because it may seem non traditional, or mandated, or costly...what are the environmental downsides to a lead ban?

I don't know that there is an "environmental" downside to a lead ban. The question to be asked though, is the "environmental" benefit enough to justify the other consequences? I think it would be a similar argument for global warming issues...burning less fossil fuels is good for the environment... but has severe economic and societal consequences if it were banned outright. If the government came out tomorrow with a law that outlawed all motorized travel except electric cars... I don't think anyone would be arguing about an "environmental downside" but they WOULD be screaming about the fact that the $80k truck in their driveway is now worthless and illegal to drive...

 

[Jesse Jaymes]

Ok....but what is the real financial impact. I make my own ammo. Barnes bullets are $50-$70 for 50. Bergers are no cheaper.

Factory lead free are very obtainable. I see almost 0 financial impact to the hunter.

 

[packgoatguy]

Ok....but what is the real financial impact. I make my own ammo. Barnes bullets are $50-$70 for 50. Bergers are no cheaper.

Factory lead free are very obtainable. I see almost 0 financial impact to the hunter.

Who says it has to be a financial impact to the hunter? See post #45 for my response to this question previously.

However... there is a real financial impact that has been noted in previous posts... many of us own thousands of dollars worth of projectiles containing lead, along with factory ammo containing lead. If there were a law banning the use of these projectiles and ammo, our investment would have been wasted, and we would have to re-invest in lead-free projectiles. For someone shooting a half box of ammo a year... maybe not a big deal... for someone shooting 500-1000 rounds a year, it's a bigger deal. For those shooting a few thousand rounds a year... its a really big deal.