# This ain't archery, but the threat is still the same...



## bigtone1411 (Nov 3, 2011)

I can understand when they banned lead shot for waterfowl, but banning lead bullets, especially for big game hunting is ridiculous and not based in science. How many big game hunters even fire more than one shot during a hunt. This is just a liberal attempt to strip one more thing away from hunters and gun ownwers. They already have the lead bullet ban in So. California, due to the California Condor. They claim the stupid bird eats carcasses that hunters shot and they get lead poisoning. The bird has already been extinct in the wild, the only reason there are any left is beacause they breed them in captivity and release them. The only reason they are extinct (endandgered) is due to human encroachment on there habitat. (They are too stupid to avaod electric and telephone lines) Why doesnt the EPA just ban large cities or any future development for that matter. People, over the next couple of decaded, everything that outdoorsmen hold deer will probably be gone. Sorry I am so negative, but its just the way I feel.


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

bigtone1411 said:


> I can understand when they banned lead shot for waterfowl, but banning lead bullets, especially for big game hunting is ridiculous and not based in science. How many big game hunters even fire more than one shot during a hunt. This is just a liberal attempt to strip one more thing away from hunters and gun ownwers. They already have the lead bullet ban in So. California, due to the California Condor. They claim the stupid bird eats carcasses that hunters shot and they get lead poisoning. The bird has already been extinct in the wild, the only reason there are any left is beacause they breed them in captivity and release them. The only reason they are extinct (endandgered) is due to human encroachment on there habitat. (They are too stupid to avaod electric and telephone lines) Why doesnt the EPA just ban large cities or any future development for that matter. People, over the next couple of decaded, everything that outdoorsmen hold deer will probably be gone. Sorry I am so negative, but its just the way I feel.


 No... you are definitely right... but this *is going to lead* to discussions on wounding and traditional archery is going to be the first target. We're all targets... and have been for a number of years now.

Aloha... :beer:


----------



## Highstrung1 (Oct 20, 2010)

bigtone1411 said:


> I can understand when they banned lead shot for waterfowl, but banning lead bullets, especially for big game hunting is ridiculous and not based in science. How many big game hunters even fire more than one shot during a hunt. This is just a liberal attempt to strip one more thing away from hunters and gun ownwers. They already have the lead bullet ban in So. California, due to the California Condor. They claim the stupid bird eats carcasses that hunters shot and they get lead poisoning. The bird has already been extinct in the wild, the only reason there are any left is beacause they breed them in captivity and release them. The only reason they are extinct (endandgered) is due to human encroachment on there habitat. (They are too stupid to avaod electric and telephone lines) Why doesnt the EPA just ban large cities or any future development for that matter. People, over the next couple of decaded, everything that outdoorsmen hold deer will probably be gone. Sorry I am so negative, but its just the way I feel.


Why can you understand the banning of lead shot for waterfowl?


----------



## bigtone1411 (Nov 3, 2011)

Highstrung, I like to evaluate my opinions on things based on evidence. I love waterfowl hunting, and wish that I could use lead, because even though the non toxic shot is getting better, nothing patterns like lead in my opinion. Nonetheless, there is plenty of evidence that waterfowl will eat lead pellets when rooting through the mud and die of lead poisoning. The rate of this happening is much higher than the once in a great while event of some condor eating the lead contaminated body of a deer that escaped the hunter. But that is the problem with extreme liberalism, there may be scientific evidence for banning in one instance, but they will never stop at the common sense end of things. They will use that victory to infringe on everything else.


----------



## bigtone1411 (Nov 3, 2011)

Rattus, I get tired of the crowd that whines about wounding. I don't care what method of hunting you use, animals are going to get wounded. I would hope that an ethical hunter of any type of weapon would keep his shot to where he is confident, but we can't control everybody can we? More animals are probably wounded from automobiles than hunters, yet nobody is screaming for a ban on driving. At least outdoorsman's dollars account for most of the conservation money that is spent on preserving wildlife and it's habbitat. Most of these "tree huggers" can't really say they put their money where there mouth is. Everybody who considers themselves an outdoorsman or a sportsman is in this thing together. I respect all my brothers whether they fish with a fly rod or spinning gear. Weather they hunt with a compound or rifle. As long as they obey the law and respect the resource. That's all I have to say.


----------



## Easykeeper (Jan 2, 2003)

I tried to read the link, got some nasty internet action from it. It wouldn't load and from then on every site I went to wouldn't load and I kept seeing "tracking" on the bottom of the page. Had to quit everything and restart the 'puter to make things right...FYI. So I really don't know what the article said but will make a general comment.

I'd like to see some solid research on banning lead bullets for big game hunting. Lead shot for waterfowl has been known for many years to be a problem so the non-toxic shot is a necessary evil. I guess until I see some more solid evidence, I'm with bigtone1411. Seems like the California Condor situation, even if it is valid, is pretty isolated to mandate a general ban. 

That said, it's probably just a matter of time until lead in bullets is banned. I have read of concerns about lead in meat that hunters eat, especially kids, who are most susceptible to lead poisoning. While I'm not sure of the validity of those concerns it certainly bears further research. Especially when there are good programs like "Hunters Feeding the Hungry" that might be affected. The meat around a gunshot wound is usually trimmed away but maybe there's something to it, would be good to know if there is. I think some of the all copper bullets are showing performance and accuracy standards that would make them an acceptable substitute, although at a higher cost.

Lead in anything is being phased out for mostly good reasons. It's going to be hard to justify taking a stand against removing lead from bullets in the long run when there are acceptable substitutes. I agree it's probably on the slippery slope toward serious infringement of our hunting and shooting rights, just seems kind of inevitable. Besides, if there _is_ validity to the claims, then I guess I would not be opposed. Like I said, if there is a concern there should be some statistics or data somewhere that shows it.


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

bigtone1411 said:


> Rattus, I get tired of the crowd that whines about wounding. I don't care what method of hunting you use, animals are going to get wounded. I would hope that an ethical hunter of any type of weapon would keep his shot to where he is confident, but we can't control everybody can we? More animals are probably wounded from automobiles than hunters, yet nobody is screaming for a ban on driving. At least outdoorsman's dollars account for most of the conservation money that is spent on preserving wildlife and it's habbitat. Most of these "tree huggers" can't really say they put their money where there mouth is. Everybody who considers themselves an outdoorsman or a sportsman is in this thing together. I respect all my brothers whether they fish with a fly rod or spinning gear. Weather they hunt with a compound or rifle. As long as they obey the law and respect the resource. That's all I have to say.


While I agree with you, the USFWS is working against hunters all over the country in all sorts of ways... they have falsified data on wolves, bobcats, and bears. They have funneled monies to environmentalists to fight against us... which we here in Hawaii as well as elsewhere provided reams of data... in our case over 40 pounds we mailed. And, just so you know, it is not hunters that are providing the most of the monies anymore... at least in 2011 it wasn't.. it was from target shooters and ammunition.

We need to be vigilante and ahead of the curve with this stuff. What do you think gets into our schools regarding hunting? How well we do in presenting hunting in a promising and pro-hunting vein is going to be crucial going forward. We are no longer a rural community. Trapping, hunting and fishing are popular sport but no longer necessities, and the message is lost on an urban campus. An campuses are liberal.. and anti-gun... and by nature.. anti hunting. Archery and wounding losses are going to be high on their list. Lead is another.


----------



## Bongos (Nov 9, 2011)

it's happen here in CA and it sucks, solid brass bullets are expensive, even if you reload. Oh, I didnt even know they sale venison here as a meat... besides, I wouldnt want to eat the deer here anyways, they look sickly form all of the polution ;(


----------



## jbw59 (Jun 27, 2010)

I would hope that everyone here is a member of the NRA. Name me another organization that fights as effectively to protect our rights as they do? Not just second amendment rights but hunting rights as well. At some point, the "conservationists" might come after carbon arrows and the steel used in broadheads. That's just how they roll.


----------



## Yewselfbow (Jan 28, 2006)

So ... introducing small concentrates of lead into the environment and into the food chain isn't a problem to some. So .... would you be happy to serve up a soution of 1 milligramm of lead (Pb) into 100ml water and get your children, grandchildren or pregnant wife to drink it once a month for a year ?????


----------



## stanlh (Jul 23, 2010)

Yewselfbow said:


> So ... introducing small concentrates of lead into the environment and into the food chain isn't a problem to some. So .... would you be happy to serve up a soution of 1 milligramm of lead (Pb) into 100ml water and get your children, grandchildren or pregnant wife to drink it once a month for a year ?????


The answer of course is no, no one would say yes to intentionally introducing lead into their wife or children, but do you have scientific evidence that this actually happens in the real world as a result of using lead rifle bullets or is this a hypothetical?
Because if it is a hypothetical it makes no sense whatsoever.


----------



## threetoe (May 13, 2011)

The only problem with lead is lead poisoning caused by ingestion. 
You could take a hunk of lead and swallow it and it'll pass right through. 
However...
Waterfowl and most birds have GIZZARDS that act like a Mortar and Pistil to grind up their food. When a Duck picks up small rocks to use in their gizzard, they pick up lead shot. They effectively poison themselves because the soft lead is ground into pieces in the gizzard and absorbed into the blood stream.
The bird issue is real.
The new non-toxic shot like Hevi-Shot are actually better for use on waterfowl because a size #6 Hevi-Shot has the knock down of lead 4's or steel BB's.

Bill


----------



## SilverB (Mar 11, 2012)

My post will not have a whole lot to do with hunting, but I think its legitimate.

IMO there is a difference between a good idea, and a LAW. There are MANY good ideas that should not be laws. For example- Seat belts are the LAW. Having a car seat for a child BEFORE you leave the hospital is the LAW. In my town, Smoking in any public restaurant is ILLEGAL. Restaurants are not allowed to have smoking. IMO if I want to open a restaurant that allows smoking, you DON'T HAVE TO EAT THERE. Texting while driving is against the law. Using lead shot to kill waterfowl is against the law... etc.

All of the above LAWS are good ideas, but bad laws that will NEVER GO AWAY. What kind of polititian is going to run an advertisement saying he wants to make seat belts optional....

As human beings, we have the right to make our own decisions. The direction our great country is going is slowly but very VERY surely taking away our right to make our own decisions.


----------



## threetoe (May 13, 2011)

"The road to hell is paved in good intentions".


----------

