Monos vs. Lead. Which do you choose and why?

[35WhelenAI]

The discussion has (de) evolved to comical, again. The argument isn't hunters consuming, obviously, as guys say clearly "I'll consume lead if it's in my meat because I choose". It's for the environment and animals that don't know any better. That's the part about being human, we have the capability to know better. Seems it is apathy, not stubbornness or ignorance.

 

[prm]

Both. The reason I have used a mono for one rifle is the bullet weight (velocity), accuracy, and performance has been excellent. When I want the option of a bit more range I use a normal c&c/bonded bullet. They all work.
Lead in the gut pile for the scavengers is what drove monos, not human health.

 

[JGRaider]

Both. The reason I have used a mono for one rifle is the bullet weight (velocity), accuracy, and performance has been excellent. When I want the option of a bit more range I use a normal c&c/bonded bullet. They all work.
Lead in the gut pile for the scavengers is what drove monos, not human health.

Oh, I get it now. We have a decreasing population of scavengers today because these scavengers have eaten the gut piles of animals that have lead particles in them, from bullets? Seriously?

 

[JGRaider]

The discussion has (de) evolved to comical, again. The argument isn't hunters consuming, obviously, as guys say clearly "I'll consume lead if it's in my meat because I choose". It's for the environment and animals that don't know any better. That's the part about being human, we have the capability to know better. Seems it is apathy, not stubbornness or ignorance.

And we all have brains that should give us common sense and the ability to decipher BS from reality.

 

[35WhelenAI]

It's a choice to believe in a pile of crap or to live in reality even though both can stink.

 

[Jason Snyder]

No- every study that I am aware that has tried to state that has serious flaws, or was outright funded, sponsored, or influenced by ani hunters, or anti-lead people and orgs.

There certainly is some stuff to filter through. That said, there are studies that show an elevated BLL in people who eat game meat.


Neither does any one else.

Certainly rhetorical, but then again a lot of folks do things that are directly known to have adverse affects.

Legit, broad based data that shows that hunters have higher lead levels than non hunters, when other lifestyle factors are accounted for- doesn’t exist.

Reaponses in red.

Given the political nature of lead bullets, there is a lot of background noise to sort through. One thing that is indisputable is the presence of lead in game meat. New technology shows there is even more lead than a radiograph will show.

I’ll be the first to admit there is no smoking gun data. That said, it was an easy choice for me. The presence of lead fragments in meat my young kids ate on a regular basis was a non starter for me.

Given there are very effective alternatives, I have no qualms with switching. I’ve shot a pretty decent sample size of animals over 25 years and have never had an unrecoverable animal that was due to a copper bullet.

On the ecological side, I’ve dealt with raptors suffering from lead poisoning. It’s kind of ugly. If I can minimize that in the process, so much the better.

I get it folks get touchy about mandated copper use. To me it’s an easy choice. I’m not trying to speak to anyone else’s decision. Everyone’s risk assessment is different.

 

[35WhelenAI]

I understand what you're saying about risk assessment. Typically that's with respect to oneself and one's immediate family or other people they care about. Risk assessment with respect to animals in the wild and lead is a nonstarter, and been proven as a poison to some pretty awesome species.

 

[Jason Snyder]

Risk assessment with respect to animals in the wild and lead is a nonstarter, and been proven as a poison to some pretty awesome species

I’m not disagreeing on this. It’s a pretty big rabbit hole to go down, fraught with red herrings.

 

[35WhelenAI]

A rabbit hole to me is an exercise in futility with nothing but a dead end. Effects of lead on other species of game besides the dead animal we take home to eat is shown beyond any reasonable doubt, as you have stated from experience in dealing with them.

The antis are licking their chops when guys say they're not gonna give up their lead for reason X, Y and Z that are monotonously stated over and over. Do we wanna hunt with copper in our lifetime or have no hunting sooner in another generations lifetime? Easy effing choice. Some would rather hunting die from 1000 shots to our own foot than get off the high horse.

A bit like game management. Antis look at the single animal, and how traumatic it must be for the single animal, when hunters are looking at the health of the population as a whole. Interesting psyche that some hunters put "individuality" above the opportunity to do it at all for as long as possible for generations to come long after we are gone.

 

[49ereric]

eagle population is still climbing.

 

[Formidilosus]

It's for the environment and animals that don't know any better. That's the part about being human, we have the capability to know better. Seems it is apathy, not stubbornness or ignorance.

This is why it devolves- what you wrote above is bullshit. I’m stating it plainly so my meaning is understood.

If it was about “knowing better” or because you “care” about the animals- you wouldn’t be shooting them. You wouldn’t shoot coyotes, bobcats, mountain lions, bears, skunks, badgers- or any other predator because they’re predators. You wouldn’t shoot prairie dogs and ground squirrels for fun. You wouldn’t fish and then throw them back. You wouldn’t drive a car, use synthetic clothing, use oils, chemicals, or pesticides. You wouldn’t use bleach, you wouldn’t be ok with pharmaceuticals, birth control, planes, trains, automobiles, manufactured rubber or plastic, wind mills, coal, or electric cars.

The problem with all of the lead discussions is that it is a bad faith discussion. I have sat in meetings and briefings about “lead bullet bad” way before anyone here even heard about it, I can almost assure you.
It’s not about “the poor eagles”- that’s an emotional hook, that people who also clamber for solar panels everywhere and veganism push- things that result in millions of more death to wildlife than about anything next in line.

 

[35WhelenAI]

If it's emotional that lead in and of itself is not poisonous to living organisms that ingest it, I will stand corrected.

Hunting/fishing in and of itself is an enterprise that is good for the health of any overall population, not the individual animals. Others affected (death or otherwise) are not the ones that are killed directly as a result of the projectile. The topic is not other things in life that could necessarily be improved. It deflects the isssue turning the debate to cars, birth control (!?), plastics, pesticides, solar et al.. Those are no less worthy of discussion, however do not support the topic at hand with respect to monos versus lead.

 

[Formidilosus]

The antis are licking their chops when guys say they're not gonna give up their lead for reason X, Y and Z that are monotonously stated over and over.

No they’re not. Thats fuddlore nonsense. Do you know anti hunters? I do, and have. Have you sat in meetings and discussions with them? I do, and have. They don’t give two flips what stupid excuse they use, and they don’t care at all how you kill an animal- their sole goal is to stop all hunting- every single type and place. It is utter ignorance to say otherwise.

Do we wanna hunt with copper in our lifetime or have no hunting sooner in another generations lifetime? Easy effing choice. Some would rather hunting die from 1000 shots to our own foot than get off the high horse.

You have no idea what you are talking about. Do you believe those same people “just want AR15’s” and will stop at your hunting rifle too?

A bit like game management. Antis look at the single animal, and how traumatic it must be for the single animal, when hunters are looking at the health of the population as a whole. Interesting psyche that some hunters put "individuality" above the opportunity to do it at all for as long as possible for generations to come long after we are gone.

That makes no sense. The US conservation model is built on population level issues, not individual level issues. The population of raptors is higher right now than at any point in life of any person alive. Their lead poisoning levels- which has not dropped in any area with banning of lead ammo…. Is not remotely their largest, or even top ten mortality factors. If you cared about raptors- you would go after the #1 cause of mortality. Then #2, etc. So would anyone whose honest concern is for raptors.


The hunting world has problems- we speak out of both sides of our mouths. More plainly the hunting community lies.

“We care about the resource”.

“The resource is over taxed”

“Recruit more hunters!!!!”



“We care about the birds- stop shooting lead”

“By the way, buy all new clothing that is laced with chemicals and plastics that unequivocally, and demonstrably DO cause issues in wildlife”.

“But we care about the birds!”

 

[Formidilosus]

If it's emotional that lead in and of itself is not poisonous to creatures, that ingest it, I will stand corrected.

Every single thing that we do as a modern society is bad for creatures.

 

[Jason Snyder]

Every single thing that we do as a modern society is bad for creatures.

Correct. We learn new things every year about everyday products that have a profoundly negative impact on wildlife and fish. Not much we use or do isn’t without consequence.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[35WhelenAI]

Form, I do know anti-hunters. I work with some, I sit in church with some, my kids growing up had friends who had parents that were. I've listen to them in coverage of state legislature. I've watched the anti-hunting legislation get proposed in my home state. To a person all they cared about was the individual animal. They had no clue the reason they could watch herds of elk or deer grazing in a field was result of game management has taken place over the last century. Not sure what about that is bullshit, but I'll stand by my bullshit and you can stand by yours.

Folks that say they won't give up lead because they don't believe the evidence of lead being a poison (lol) or they don't believe that they should be told what to hunt with or shoot out of their guns, are thinking about themselves. My example was very clear. Hunters should be interested in managing a population of a given species. However, the attitude of I will shoot what I damn well please out of my gun, is quite a stark contrast with respect to interest in preserving hunting as a whole.

 

[Grundy53]

A rabbit hole to me is an exercise in futility with nothing but a dead end. Effects of lead on other species of game besides the dead animal we take home to eat is shown beyond any reasonable doubt, as you have stated from experience in dealing with them.

The antis are licking their chops when guys say they're not gonna give up their lead for reason X, Y and Z that are monotonously stated over and over. Do we wanna hunt with copper in our lifetime or have no hunting sooner in another generations lifetime? Easy effing choice. Some would rather hunting die from 1000 shots to our own foot than get off the high horse.

A bit like game management. Antis look at the single animal, and how traumatic it must be for the single animal, when hunters are looking at the health of the population as a whole. Interesting psyche that some hunters put "individuality" above the opportunity to do it at all for as long as possible for generations to come long after we are gone.

Do you really think that if all hunters switched to lead free bullets, the antis would just stop wanting to end all hunting?

Sent from my SM-S901U using Tapatalk

 

[Formidilosus]

Correct. We learn new things every year about everyday products that have a profoundly negative impact on wildlife and fish. Not much we use or do isn’t without consequence.

That’s my issue with the lead bullet arguments- they’re red herrings.

One thing that is indisputable is the presence of lead in game meat. New technology shows there is even more lead than a radiograph will show.

It’s not so clear cut. I’ve had my meat tested. Most of the studies that checked processed meat either were poorly done, or were done with questionable efforts- I.E. butchers being instructed to use every piece of meat possible and grind it all. Etc.

Treat game meat like high end butchers do wagyu beef, where anything that you wouldn’t eat in a steak, gets tossed instead of ground up, and you don’t get lead in meat.

I’ll be the first to admit there is no smoking gun data. That said, it was an easy choice for me. The presence of lead fragments in meat my young kids ate on a regular basis was a non starter for me.

And that’s perfectly reasonable. At the same time, I ask- do they drink out of plastic cups, use plastic silverware, get vaccines, etc? If they do- why did you land on lead bullets as the thing for you instead of the hundreds to thousands of others things that you could cut out in daily life that has legit data that cause issues?

That’s mostly rhetorical- I’m not trying to argue with you, or against your choice. It’s just critically looking at the thought process when people use those arguments/justifications.

Given there are very effective alternatives, I have no qualms with switching. I’ve shot a pretty decent sample size of animals over 25 years and have never had an unrecoverable animal that was due to a copper bullet.

I know dudes who choose monos because they like how clean the carcass is when butchering- that’s a logical reason to me.

However, I have seen a lot of animals by anyones standards (save maybe a market shooter of Roos), and I have seen a bunch of issues with mono’s. Just their lower BC alone will, and does cause more wounded animals and lost animals at shots I, and those I hunt with, take.

On the ecological side, I’ve dealt with raptors suffering from lead poisoning. It’s kind of ugly. If I can minimize that in the process, so much the better.

I have too. However, the logical leap from “this sucks” to its because of bullets from dead big game…. Not so much. The fuel I accidentally spill on the ground this year will cause more death for wildfires than all the bullets in game animals I have shot. That doesn’t mean I don’t care- quite the opposite. But, it does mean I am not ruled by an illogical emotion. Everything we do has consequences.

 

[Jason Snyder]

If they do- why did you land on lead bullets as the thing for you instead of the hundreds to thousands of others things that you could cut out in daily life that has legit data that cause issues?

It’s a thing, not the thing. It was an easy fix. In all honesty if there was a the thing it would have been prohibition of smart phones, using the rear view to look back.

That’s my issue with the lead bullet arguments- they’re red herrings.

Anything can be used as a red herring.

I know dudes who choose monos because they like how clean the carcass is when butchering- that’s a logical reason to me.

It’s certainly a huge side benefit. Huge.

Just their lower BC alone will, and does cause more wounded animals and lost animals at shots I, and those I hunt with, take.

I can’t speak to this. My longest shot on game is about 410.

Everything we do has consequences.

Absolutely.

 

[35WhelenAI]

Do you really think that if all hunters switched to lead free bullets, the antis would just stop wanting to end all hunting?

Sent from my SM-S901U using Tapatalk

Oh, hell no let's not confuse doing the best we can when we can with stopping their march.

However IMO, doing the best we can when we can is acknowledging lead is an issue and if it slows the March even a little bit, that's something we can do as hunters to support the health of our overall sport, our rights/privileges
and each other.

Antis don't give a shit about wind farms or other things that are harmful to animals. They just care about what WE do that's harmful for animals. Even if the lead issue is 1000th on the list of issues affecting overall wildlife of all types, why would I want to do anything to give them reason to make it into their top 10.