# ban lead bullets is started



## Matatazela

huntfish25 said:


> The UC-Santa Cruz researchers used a "fingerprinting" technique based on the unique isotope ratios found in different sources of lead. The technique enabled them to match the lead in blood samples from condors to the lead in ammunition.


If this is true, there should be support from hunters. I mean come on - how much in percentage terms does ammunition constitute when it comes to a hunt?


----------



## huntfish25

iits a choice. it the first step what next, i dont bird hunt but what i herd since they band lead shot was they cant find another repacement for the lead. steel has done nothing but crippel birds and copper is not heavy enough. the tunxon is high price that caost alot of money. they will band lead shot for squiles and rabbits soon you watch. turkey proble be band in the next 5 years. now the fifle is startes there trend to band lead and soon it will be band with in the next 10 years. it could rasid prices duble the price of bullet. you will pay $40 - $60 a box 20. why because of lead and where do lead come from? ground.


----------



## archerm3

Relax a bit here I think..


> they already band lead from bird hunting now it going to start with big game hunting, this is a way the goverment to make ban hunting or to make it so pricy we cant aford to hunt.


 I dont think the government has to worry about that, the real estate market and hunting demand is taking care of that in accessibility to hunting area costs far outweigh any bullet prices.



> this is my opion he is the story i know this is just one place but you are not allow to used any lead on any military base, this has force the military to buy non lead bullets that coast us thousand of dollars.


Um, not true. Not even close.



> Last November a consortium of environmental activists, including the Wishtoyo Foundation, Physicians for Social Responsibility, the Center for Biological Diversity and the Natural Resources Defense Council filed suit in U.S. District Court in Los Angeles seeking a ban on the use of lead bullets by hunters in the state's condor ranges.
> 
> The plaintiffs cited studies showing that lead from bullets left in carcasses or gut piles from game animals is a major source of lead poisoning in the rare and endangered condors.


Sounds plausible to me. Yes I understand we have to be on our guard over wacky studies by environmentalists, but this actually sounds very believable. I also believe that if we hunters want to be taken seriously, we need to actively assist the wildlife that we dont hunt, not just the game animals, same as we ask the nonhunters to respect all animals, not just the cute ones.

I suppose if the state really wanted to, they could just ban all hunting in the Condor areas, which would be a lot easier and cheaper in the long run, wouldnt it? You gotta pick your battles, and as an outsider to California, I dont know, but it sounds like this is one to let go.

Lead is very invasive when combined with water sources, and considering I drink well water, I have some sympathy when it comes to heavy metal pollution that people end up drinking.


----------



## archerm3

huntfish25 said:


> they already band lead from bird hunting now it going to start with big game hunting, .


Oh, and not true. Only in areas of waterfowl habitat is nonlead shot required, due to the way ducks and geese feed, they end up swallowing the shot that begins to accumulate after decades and decades of hunters hunting over the same spot.


----------



## Professur

I like how lead poisoning humans is barely a footnote in that article. In fact, the entire article appears to be written about protecting the habitat and food source of an animal which no longer exists in the wild.


----------



## Buksknr53

There was an article in a recent issue of Deer&Deer Hunting magazine about this same issue. It was an interesting article. In the issue, they talked about the amount of lead found in all scavengers who eat gut piles and deer that die from gun shots and are never recovered. Bullet fragments were found in the majority of the gut piles and caracsses found. The study also found that copper bullets fragmented less than lead bullets. 
One solution that was discussed was for hunters to be required to not leave gut piles in the woods when they field dress a kill. 
This article really opened my eyes to how this study will affect hunting in the future. This study will definately give the anti's another issue to use against hunting. It will be interesting to see how far this goes and what the outcome will be.


----------



## x-shocker

I will totally support a total ban on lead shots and lead bullets. Lead is a poisonous substance and the sooner we ban it, the better. There are so many alternatives to lead that lead is no longer needed. I use steel shots for all my bird hunts. For my deer and bear hunts, I use Barnes X-bullets.

"The price of non-lead shots are too expensive." Wrong. Steel shots are sometimes cheaper than lead.

"Steel shots does not have the down range energy of lead." True, but all one has to do is go up two sizes and the energy will be the same. If you can not hit your bird with #4 steel when you can do it with #6 lead, you need to go to the range more often.

"Non-lead bullets will be too expensive for the average Joe." Wrong. Sure, Barnes X bullets and Winchesters Fail Safe bullets costs about $2 per round, but in the world of rifle hunting, a box of 20 rounds will last the Average Joe 3+ years. So, if the Average Joe is complaining about spending $2-$10 per year on bullets being too expensive, wait until Average Joe goes to the pump to fill up his truck for the trip.


----------



## littleyellow

I will have to wait and see what Fox and the NRA says about this before I make my full unbiased opinion :wink:  

There is no, I repeat, no study that says lead is good for you.

Make your shots count and you won't need as much shot :thumbs_up 

Why are people so gullible......no wonder this country is bankrupt.


----------



## huntfish25

x-shocker said:


> I will totally support a total ban on lead shots and lead bullets. Lead is a poisonous substance and the sooner we ban it, the better. There are so many alternatives to lead that lead is no longer needed. I use steel shots for all my bird hunts. For my deer and bear hunts, I use Barnes X-bullets.
> 
> "The price of non-lead shots are too expensive." Wrong. Steel shots are sometimes cheaper than lead.
> 
> "Steel shots does not have the down range energy of lead." True, but all one has to do is go up two sizes and the energy will be the same. If you can not hit your bird with #4 steel when you can do it with #6 lead, you need to go to the range more often.
> 
> "Non-lead bullets will be too expensive for the average Joe." Wrong. Sure, Barnes X bullets and Winchesters Fail Safe bullets costs about $2 per round, but in the world of rifle hunting, a box of 20 rounds will last the Average Joe 3+ years. So, if the Average Joe is complaining about spending $2-$10 per year on bullets being too expensive, wait until Average Joe goes to the pump to fill up his truck for the trip.



this is a perfect point, there is little proff that using lead bullets cause lead posin. i know p[eople who is walking around with bullets in them and yes lead bullets. they took a bunch aof birds and clame lead posin was found with little proof where it came from. they clam it came from the shot but it have came from the water they drink. if not in the army but have hunted of fort mead base in maryland you can not used any lead bullets at all. unless i wrong they told me all the bases are doing the same. if you dont want to used lead bullets dont but i dont think we all should force to do the same. using steel shot have been proven thet steel shot is not as good as lead shot. for people always talk about shot place ment and dont allow animals to suffer is ok for shooting at bird with shot that is not ding it job. i know tuxon is doing a good job but it caost alot more. i like to inform those i used copper slugs when i used my shot guns but i dont want people to be force to used $10 a box when theyt can buy a box for $5


----------



## sean

I swallowed a lead muzzleloader ball .50 when I was a kid my mom freaked but the doc said not to worry I guess im glad im not an iindangered bird


----------



## littleyellow

Swallow about one a week and tell me how that works out for you.....remember they used to say smoking was okay as well :wink: :wink: So was asbestos :wink: :wink:


----------



## jigglestick

we have been and I still do chew on lead sinkers, while squeezing them onto my fishing line, for years.
this is just another attempt to controll our habbits. 
the people who head these tyraids have to much time on their hands.
if you support this sort of activity, fine, that is your choice, but believe me, they will soon set their sights on something you love to do.
we'll see how you feel then.


----------



## sean

one step closer to an outright ban on amunition , then hell what do you need a gun for so give those up to


----------



## littleyellow

Scientists...yeah what do they know. They only get paid to study stuff the normal person can't. Biting lead sinkers is not the same....


----------



## sean

littleyellow said:


> Scientists...yeah what do they know. They only get paid to study stuff the normal person can't. Biting lead sinkers is not the same....


tell me one thing they agree on as a whole other than the world is round not a whole lot


----------



## littleyellow

They agree lead is bad for you, smoking is bad, etc. Dumb scientists...no need in even attempting a good debate...your mind is made up.:zip:


----------



## x-shocker

sean said:


> tell me one thing they agree on as a whole other than the world is round not a whole lot



Lead is a poison.


----------



## ban_t

I will have too look at this study. Since it states many things, mainly this
The assertion that lead bullets and fragments in carcasses eaten by condors are a major source of lead poisoning for the endangered birds was confirmed in August by scientists at the University of California-Santa Cruz. They published a study online in the journal Environmental Science & Technology that examined and analyzed lead from rifle bullets and shotgun pellets.

The Question I have is that is it old lead or new lead. What I ask is was the lead there first. Yes they stated it was from missed shots, dead animals, gut piles also they stated it toke several years to poison them. That it had too build up in the system to harm them. 

"We will never have a self-sustaining condor population without addressing the lead issue," said Jesse Grantham, California condor coordinator for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

Also if we have only 300 condors and it is not a self sustaining population what else besides Lead is killing the birds? They have found one thing but I think the real story has not been told. 

I think everyone should look at the whole picture not just what one study out of Callifornia says. One study is all they show too change the way they want you too hunt. I need more than just the left side telling me what is true.


----------



## x-shocker

ban_t said:


> I think everyone should look at the whole picture not just what one study out of Callifornia says. One study is all they show too change the way they want you too hunt. I need more than just the left side telling me what is true.


Just one question for you:

Do you think lead is a poisonous substance?


----------



## sean

littleyellow said:


> They agree lead is bad for you, smoking is bad, etc. Dumb scientists...no need in even attempting a good debate...your mind is made up.:zip:


just read smoking in moderation is good ... drinking good sun light good you can read just as many that say its all bad ........ global warming is a good one just as many say its natural as say its human caused just a few years ago they said we were headed towards an ice age come on .....


----------



## sn_lhy

You may not want to believe this but lead is a real problem. 
A lot of wild life dies from the lead that we put in there environment. We have to cut down on how much we put in the environment. there will be a cost to this that we will pay for the question is now or later.
talk to you later


----------



## littleyellow

Is this board owned by Rupert Murdoch by chance    :mg: :mg: :wink:


----------



## sean

littleyellow said:


> Is this board owned by Rupert Murdoch by chance    :mg: :mg: :wink:




I'll bet a weeks pay way way way more animals that carion eaters prey on are hit by cars than are shot and left to the birds ..... come on we are talking about california how many critters are shot and left to rot any way dosent even make sense go for a hike tell me how many gun shot animals you find just lying about decomposing sounds like another bad excuse to ban hunting in that area ..........what you dont think bunny huggers have scientists on the payroll :darkbeer:


----------



## sean

sean said:


> I'll bet a weeks pay way way way more animals that carion eaters prey on are hit by cars than are shot and left to the birds ..... come on we are talking about california how many critters are shot and left to rot any way dosent even make sense go for a hike tell me how many gun shot animals you find just lying about decomposing sounds like another bad excuse to ban hunting in that area ..........what you dont think bunny huggers have scientists on the payroll :darkbeer:





sounds like a good way to get every trap club and outdoor range wiped out over night no more sporting clays no more cowboy action or soft lead for silouete shoots certainly no more .22 smalbore cuz most if not all 22 bullets have no jacket at all kick open the door for the gun banners of america hedded by good old NANCY PELOSI isnt she from california too HMMMMMMMM coincidence I think not :darkbeer:


----------



## littleyellow

(R.) Brady- The original Gun Control Nut.


----------



## sean

littleyellow said:


> (R.) Brady- The original Gun Control Nut.


he just shot the wrong Brady :wink: thats all


----------



## huntfish25

littleyellow said:


> Scientists...yeah what do they know. They only get paid to study stuff the normal person can't. Biting lead sinkers is not the same....



they get paid to said what every they are told to said. one thing about grants the goverment tells who get them and who dont and if the study dont go there way they do not get there grant money. it has been proven that fish has more posin ansd that inculd lead posin. could it be that bird are getting posin from drink the water and eating the fish. i know people who has bullets in them and i know doctors said it better to leave them in then to removed them. lead posin id from bullets they will have remove those bullets


----------



## sean

science and politics are way to closely related ....... case studies are are found to be flawed more than they hold up ten years down the road they will be saying its high cholesterol killing the condor :wink:


----------



## P_R

x-shocker said:


> I will totally support a total ban on lead shots and lead bullets. Lead is a poisonous substance and the sooner we ban it, the better.
> 
> "Non-lead bullets will be too expensive for the average Joe." Wrong. Sure, Barnes X bullets and Winchesters Fail Safe bullets costs about $2 per round, but in the world of rifle hunting, a box of 20 rounds will last the Average Joe 3+ years. So, if the Average Joe is complaining about spending $2-$10 per year on bullets being too expensive, wait until Average Joe goes to the pump to fill up his truck for the trip.


I shot about 40K rounds of ammo last year between plinking with the kids, practice, varmints, and competition. Your wonderful plan would take away my hobby. This ban would eliminate a whole bunch of rifle and pistol sports. 

I just love all you goodie-goodie types that run around taking people's freedom.


----------



## sean

P_R said:


> I shot about 40K rounds of ammo last year between plinking with the kids, practice, varmints, and competition. Your wonderful plan would take away my hobby. This ban would eliminate a whole bunch of rifle and pistol sports.
> 
> I just love all you goodie-goodie types that run around taking people's freedom.




yup I reload all my stuff and shoot thousands of rounds a year you would see fit to take away a hobby I have been at since my early teens


----------



## archerm3

littleyellow said:


> They agree lead is bad for you, smoking is bad, etc. Dumb scientists...no need in even attempting a good debate...your mind is made up.:zip:


Amen brother, you cant teach a rock.


----------



## archerm3

huntfish25 said:


> they get paid to said what every they are told to said. one thing about grants the goverment tells who get them and who dont and if the study dont go there way they do not get there grant money. it has been proven that fish has more posin ansd that inculd lead posin. could it be that bird are getting posin from drink the water and eating the fish. i know people who has bullets in them and i know doctors said it better to leave them in then to removed them. lead posin id from bullets they will have remove those bullets


Yeah, because your much smarter than a scientist and know how they get their grant money and their personal and professional motivations. 
And your smarter than a doctor because you know why its better to leave a bullet inside a body rather than do exploratory surgery to remove it. Were all these people you know with bullets in them, are they cast lead bullets or copper jacketed? You know lots of people with buckshot in them? Watch out around your group! Do you have any scar tissue from a surgery?

The sky is falling Nancy, get your head underground.

I heard Elvis was in your town next week.


----------



## gmbellew

archerm3 said:


> Yeah, because your much smarter than a scientist and know how they get their grant money and their personal and professional motivations.
> And your smarter than a doctor because you know why its better to leave a bullet inside a body rather than do exploratory surgery to remove it. Were all these people you know with bullets in them, are they cast lead bullets or copper jacketed? You know lots of people with buckshot in them? Watch out around your group! Do you have any scar tissue from a surgery?
> 
> The sky is falling Nancy, get your head underground.
> 
> I heard Elvis was in your town next week.


all i will say on this subject (although it is valid for many) is only a fool would not critically question the things around them.


----------



## huntfish25

let see i dont know during the karon war did they used leadbullets so i cant comint on that. i fren father had two slugs in him. one was in the back and one was in his neck. he was on "pork chop hill" he got a medel for being the only one in his protoon to survie. my freind borrow my 25cal pistol and his consin shot him self in the shoulder. the doctor said it better to leave it then to remove it because it will do more damage trying to get it out. iknow it was copper soated but the bottom of the bullet had a lead core that is shown on the bottom. the doctor said the bullet will coat it self with fat in a few year. his mother was asked him about lead posin and he inform them that lead posin acursed when the lead oxsids. of corse i grow up in the city of baltimore and a bunch of people clame to have bullets in them. 

it funny how you can have two people with the same degreds in the same feild come up with deffert answers and both are for the people who is paying them. could it be that if they did not say what they are told to said they wont get pay? go to work today and tell your boss you hate the company and that you going to put it in the news papers. see what in your next check? i sure he will not keep you long. why do you think it deffert with grants the goverment give away


----------



## littleyellow

Ok you win.....if you find me one single study that says lead is good for you and not harmful. 

I think my dad would beg to differ with you on the lead in the body thing....he had problems for years but the sorry VA wouldn't remove it. He finally got it removed...looked like freaking rocks. How we treat our soldiers is for another thread however.


----------



## x-shocker

huntfish25 said:


> let see i dont know during the karon war did they used leadbullets so i cant comint on that. i fren father had two slugs in him. one was in the back and one was in his neck. he was on "pork chop hill" he got a medel for being the only one in his protoon to survie. my freind borrow my 25cal pistol and his consin shot him self in the shoulder. the doctor said it better to leave it then to remove it because it will do more damage trying to get it out. iknow it was copper soated but the bottom of the bullet had a lead core that is shown on the bottom. the doctor said the bullet will coat it self with fat in a few year. his mother was asked him about lead posin and he inform them that lead posin acursed when the lead oxsids. of corse i grow up in the city of baltimore and a bunch of people clame to have bullets in them.
> 
> it funny how you can have two people with the same degreds in the same feild come up with deffert answers and both are for the people who is paying them. could it be that if they did not say what they are told to said they wont get pay? go to work today and tell your boss you hate the company and that you going to put it in the news papers. see what in your next check? i sure he will not keep you long. why do you think it deffert with grants the goverment give away


Lead poisoning does not come from lead being embedded in the flesh. To get lead poisoning, an animal will have to absorb it either through the digestive or respiratory tract.


----------



## x-shocker

P_R said:


> I shot about 40K rounds of ammo last year between plinking with the kids, practice, varmints, and competition.


Exactly the reason why we need the ban.



> Your wonderful plan would take away my hobby. This ban would eliminate a whole bunch of rifle and pistol sports.


There are alternatives to lead. I have never seen or heard of a gun which could not shoot the alternatives.


----------



## archerm3

gmbellew said:


> all i will say on this subject (although it is valid for many) is only a fool would not critically question the things around them.


Dont drink gasoline...question that.

I dont need to. 

Learn more and complain less.


----------



## archerm3

huntfish25 said:


> *let see i dont know during the karon war did they used leadbullets so i cant comint on that. * Yet you feel qualified to question the entire California natural resources division and every scientific organization responsible for the endanged condor..i fren father had two slugs in him. one was in the back and one was in his neck. he was on "pork chop hill" he got a medel for being the only one in his protoon to survie.
> _Um, ok_...:zip:
> my freind borrow my 25cal pistol and his consin shot him self in the shoulder. the doctor said it better to leave it then to remove it because it will do more damage trying to get it out. iknow it was copper soated but the bottom of the bullet had a lead core that is shown on the bottom. the doctor said the bullet will coat it self with fat in a few year. his mother was asked him about lead posin and he inform them that lead posin acursed when the *lead oxsids* Did you mean oxides? Like when an element is exposed to oxygen in the air or water and becomes an OXIDE?. of corse i grow up in the city of baltimore and a bunch of people clame to have bullets in them.
> 
> it funny how you can have two people with the same degreds in the same feild come up with deffert answers and both are for the people who is paying them. could it be that if they did not say what they are told to said they wont get pay? go to work today and tell your boss you hate the company and that you going to put it in the news papers. see what in your next check? i sure he will not keep you long. why do you think it deffert with grants the goverment give away


Why is it different?? Have your boss give you 2 years salary up front, then see how hard you work.

Do you know what a peer review is? Scientists who dont show how they come up with their conclusions and are not universally agreed with by the others in their industry generally get ridiculed in trade publications, dont get paid and don't put out any conclusions... Kinda like getting flamed on a forum..

I'm very sorry dude but my impression from your eloquent communication style Im not sure I would believe you if you told me how to get to the gas station.


----------



## archerm3

...Hey Carlos....Got another DEE DEE DEEE


----------



## ban_t

x-shocker said:


> Just one question for you:
> 
> Do you think lead is a poisonous substance?


Yes it is I agree to that. So if that is the truly only cause then Yes we ban Lead
Right? wrong? Gas and deisel emissions are poisonous do we ban that? (we do try too control emissions). My point is lead the only cause? Is this Study the only facts we have? Lead has been a problem for many years just like DDTwas. We jump thru hoops try and save ourselves with one person leading the the charge. Sometimes we forget what the charge is about. 
1 Is it about the Condors?
2 Is it about Lead poisoning
3 Is it about Regulating type of ammo
4 is it about Gun regulation

I just have too look at it all before I jump in the band wagon
It is just my thoughts 

I would like too know why we cannot sustain a condor population @ 300 when so many strides have taken place with many other species. Such as Wolves, Mountian Lions, Hawks, Eagles and more. :mg:

So X-Shocker this is my best answer


----------



## littleyellow

Key Word....it's the "California" Condor.

I actually agree with some of your stuff you said sans the gun conspiracy crap. Are you a lobbyist with the NRA? The other stuff has merit. I would bet that pollution from an overpopulated area such as LA might have as much to do with it as lead...however how well do you think elimination of cars and population control would go over. I guess they are starting with the easiest thing to control. The fact is overpopulation does more damage to all animals than lead combined....but saying that in public would be akin to political suicide.


----------



## huntfish25

i think these three guys are not for real. they all three started only a mouth ago


----------



## littleyellow

NOPE....I AM A BOT..WHO TROLLS ARCHERY SITES....  :der: :der:


----------



## gmbellew

archerm3 said:


> Dont drink gasoline...question that.
> 
> I dont need to.
> 
> Learn more and complain less.


you are right. from now on, i will take everything any government, or government supported person or group, tells me. after all, they are the government, and are here to help.

learn more is exactly what i am suggesting folks do. not taking something someone tells you for fact, and trying to learn about it for yourself is exactly what i was suggesting. 

but thanks for tip on gasoline


----------



## x-shocker

huntfish25 said:


> i think these three guys are not for real. they all three started only a mouth ago


Whether I joined this forum a month ago or a decade ago has nothing to do with my intelligence or ignorance. Your argument is mute and pointless.

Lead is a clinically, as well as scientifically, known poison. That is a fact.

So here is the problem with dumping lead:

One guy may shoot just one box of lead shots per year and another may shoot "40 thousand" rounds per year, but lets just look at the one box per year scenario. We know that a box of shot gun shells weighs above one pound, but to make it easier to do the math, we will just round it to 1lb. We know that there is at least 100,000 bird hunters in S. Dakota alone shooting at least one box of shotgun shells per year. Now that puts about 100,000 lbs of lead into SD's environment. We know that it takes 2000 lbs to make a ton. So we have 50 tons of lead dumping onto SD per year. Finally, combine all the states and we have a massive dumping of poison.

One final thought: if lead is not a poison, why are the US armed forces spending so much tax money cleaning up their target ranges and into the development of new non-poisonous bullets?


----------



## nightprowler

Lets see if we are gonning to ban things that are harmful to animals,vehicles would have to be at the top of the list.My question is what about the person that hunts with a handgun?Much like the bowhunter a lot of practice is required for clean kills.I can purchase 500 lead bullets for my 44 for $38.04(leadhead) for 500 ,500 copper x bullets would run me $474.75(cabela's).That is a pretty big differance to me.I definantly wouldn't be practicing much.Lets face it an arrow or a copper bullet through an animals body aint axactly healthy for it.Today lead tomorrow copper,bismuth,iron,the day after that arrows.This will go on till it is to costly for the average man to hunt.


----------



## P_R

x-shocker said:


> Lead is a clinically, as well as scientifically, known poison. That is a fact.
> 
> 
> blah, blah, blah...Now that puts about 100,000 lbs of lead into SD's environment. We know that it takes 2000 lbs to make a ton. So we have 50 tons of lead dumping onto SD per year. Finally, combine all the states and we have a massive dumping of poison.
> 
> One final thought: if lead is not a poison, why are the US armed forces spending so much tax money cleaning up their target ranges and into the development of new non-poisonous bullets?


1. Poisons are used everyday in 1000's of ways. Your carbon arrows use all kinds of poisonous stuff in their manufacture. The emissions from your car are poison. Poisons are used all over the place in various cheimical reactions that in one way or another produce some product or service that people buy in order to better their lives. Now just because you happen to not buy one of these products or services, doesn't give you the right to ban it. 

2. Okay, so the world is ending because there's some lead going into the ground. Got it. My question is, "Where did it come from in the first place?" Uhhhh, did it not come from the ground? I think it's time for you to come up for air and untwist your panties.

3. The military is cleaning ranges for the same reason that we don't drill for oil in ANWR, for the same reason we haven't built an oil refinery for 35 years, and for the same reason we don't build nuclear power plants - the environmental lobby is super powerful in this country. The mission of the ecofreaks is to crush any form of capitalism yet remaining in this once free land, and replace it with their socialist utopia. And they scare the mindless lemmings like yourself into blind allegiance through exaggerated tales of lead poisoning, global warming due to auto emmissions, and those pooor poooor wittle harp seals that get their wittle bwains bashed in by big mean seal hunters who want to sell coats to those evil women who wear fur.

You should go back to hanging our with your PETA friends.


----------



## huntfish25

x-shocker said:


> Whether I joined this forum a month ago or a decade ago has nothing to do with my intelligence or ignorance. Your argument is mute and pointless.
> 
> Lead is a clinically, as well as scientifically, known poison. That is a fact.
> 
> So here is the problem with dumping lead:
> 
> One guy may shoot just one box of lead shots per year and another may shoot "40 thousand" rounds per year, but lets just look at the one box per year scenario. We know that a box of shot gun shells weighs above one pound, but to make it easier to do the math, we will just round it to 1lb. We know that there is at least 100,000 bird hunters in S. Dakota alone shooting at least one box of shotgun shells per year. Now that puts about 100,000 lbs of lead into SD's environment. We know that it takes 2000 lbs to make a ton. So we have 50 tons of lead dumping onto SD per year. Finally, combine all the states and we have a massive dumping of poison.
> 
> One final thought: if lead is not a poison, why are the US armed forces spending so much tax money cleaning up their target ranges and into the development of new non-poisonous bullets?


we did not start using lead bullets last week. we been using lead bullets for 600 years. if not more. if this is true about lead posin animals will have been deing like crazy. there is place that duck hunter been hunting for over 100 years. if this was true a fish will not be able to swim near there and bird proble will die just touching the water. there is still ducks liven there. this is just another way to control you. bullet company is getting rich off of it. it funny they never band something that will save you money. perfect expile of goverment being wrong is the AC in cars. they clame R12 freon is bad so they made R134 this suposed to be safe for the world now it just as bad as the R12 and it dont cool as good. nobody know did ether one hurt the ozone matter fact ozone may always been like it is


----------



## littleyellow

P_R, where does tobacco come from...where do volcanoes come from, where do earthquakes come from...just because it comes from the earth....does not make it good....go eat you about 100lbs of funny mushrooms and see how that works out for you. :mg: :mg: :mg: :mg:

And my god man how much FOX do you watch really...you actually think the eco lobby is more powerful than the energy lobby....PLEASE! Have a nice day.


----------



## P_R

littleyellow said:


> And my god man how much FOX do you watch really...you actually think the eco lobby is more powerful than the energy lobby....PLEASE! Have a nice day.



1. No tv in the P_R household. 

2. Obviously the energy lobby isn't as poweful as the eco lobby. If they were, we would have been building refineries in these last 35 years. The fact is that we haven't been building refineries because all the bunny huggers are up in arms over it. Do you really think that the oil guys don't want to drill off the florida and california coasts??? Does that make any sense at all? No of course they want to drill there where they know there's oil. Same with the barren Alaska wasteland known as ANWR. Who is stopping the oil men from drilling? It's the [email protected]#%#[email protected]^#^ ecofreaks - that's who. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure this stuff out. 

Now your eco buddies think it's okay to trample on our 2nd amendment rights by banning lead bullets. And it'll probably pass...eventually. And it'll just represent one more step this nation is taking down the path from freedom to slavery. So go ahead and support the lead ban, but just don't act surprised when they decide to ban something more meaningful to you in the future. Maybe it'll be bowhunting. It seems those animals really suffer from those awful broadheads. Should we ban that terrible "sport" if it'll save just one life?


----------



## ban_t

www.fws.gov/hoppermountain/cacondor/Pophistory.html 
After looking at this Population history from US Fish & Wildlife They only report of one death from lead. While the others ranged from Golden eagles, coyote, one shot & Power line electrocution. They Facts that they show is over a period from 2004-1982 In the Wild as of 12 January 2004

* Arizona = 40
* Central California= 24
* Southern California = 20
* Baja, Mexico=5
* Total = 89



In Captivity as of 12 January 2004

* World Center Birds of Prey = 41
* Los Angeles Zoo = 26
* San Diego Wild Animal Park = 22
Portland Zoo = 12
* Field pens/awaiting release= 25
* Total = 126




Deaths since 1998

* 1998 = 5
* 1999 = 7
* 2000 = 16
* 2001 = 5
* 2002 = 7
* 2003 = 11




Total Population as of 12 January 2004 =215
Revised:January 01, 2004
California Condor Recovery Program 

Hmmmmmmmm I think we should remove the power lines too that seems too have killed more condors than lead.


----------



## ubetcha

Two points that need to be corrcted are
1) military rounds are copper coated steel bullets
2) R-134a when used in a vehicle designed to use R-12 does not cool very well due to the size and design of it,s componets.This happens when a system is retro fitted to use R-134a.The new systems that use R-134a are using smaller hose sizes and redesigned componets to function efficently


----------



## huntfish25

tthere is no dalt there will be more lead posin now. i bet in few years they will revised this site and make 10% lead posin deaths. we should copy this and show this in few years when they want to band lead all to gather. animals die other then human reson when are they going to stop blamming man for killing every animal on earth. the endanger list is a great thing that teddy roselvelt did when he was presendent but when a animals get on the list you can not get it off. bald eagle will still be on it if it was not the out cry over having our national bird on the endanger list. thank you b-t for open our eyes and showing this info you found. the sad thing people like to have the goverment to control there lives, you think whith cuba 90 miles away with a person who is live and have everything and his people live in slums. people in this country will do anything to prevent this, but i never thought i will see hunter and fishmen talk like that. i guest i am wrong


----------



## huntfish25

ubetcha said:


> Two points that need to be corrcted are
> 1) military rounds are copper coated steel bullets
> 2) R-134a when used in a vehicle designed to use R-12 does not cool very well due to the size and design of it,s componets.This happens when a system is retro fitted to use R-134a.The new systems that use R-134a are using smaller hose sizes and redesigned componets to function efficently



let me tell you about car ac system the R134 dont work as good as the R12. i work on both cars and trucks. i was one of the first shop who was robben the custmers of $1000's to change everything for the new system. that why i left the shop. i work at the dealer ship when the new car cam off the line with the freon and you can barry get it down in the 40º mark. i made a gauge set so you can put R134 in the old cars so they did not have to change everything like every one wanted. i dont know who is feeden this stuff to you but if you ever find anybody who work on the old system they will all tell you r12 is the best there is and the new stuff it works but not as good and it will never will. you cant not get one person to prove to you it was the fren that was doing the damage. the best thing happen in this i made alot of money and so did every one else. ac check up sale from $9.99 in 1986 to $49.99 in 1989. ac repair averge from $50 1986 to $300 
that goverment in action


----------



## littleyellow

At the rate they are cutting trees in the southeast.....you're damn right I am an ecofreak...and proud of it. Don't worry though...at the rate they are going cutting everything in site...they will soon have to look elsewhere...maybe everyone else will become ecofreaks and actually do some good for the environment. 

Yep, a tangent on another subject :wink: 

I always thought they should bury powerlines....very unsightly:wink:


----------



## PSETX

yuo are talking about california they would rather hug a tree than eat.


----------



## x-shocker

P_R said:


> 1. Poisons are used everyday in 1000's of ways. Your carbon arrows use all kinds of poisonous stuff in their manufacture. The emissions from your car are poison. Poisons are used all over the place in various cheimical reactions that in one way or another produce some product or service that people buy in order to better their lives. Now just because you happen to not buy one of these products or services, doesn't give you the right to ban it.
> 
> 2. Okay, so the world is ending because there's some lead going into the ground. Got it. My question is, "Where did it come from in the first place?" Uhhhh, did it not come from the ground? I think it's time for you to come up for air and untwist your panties.


Sure, lead comes from Mother Earth, but does She mold it into grit size balls and throws them onto Her skin for the little birdies to pick up because they need grits to crush their food? Does She injects these lead balls into animal parts and leave them on Her skin for scavangers to eat?



> 3. The military is cleaning ranges for the same reason that we don't drill for oil in ANWR, for the same reason we haven't built an oil refinery for 35 years, and for the same reason we don't build nuclear power plants - the environmental lobby is super powerful in this country. The mission of the ecofreaks is to crush any form of capitalism yet remaining in this once free land, and replace it with their socialist utopia. And they scare the mindless lemmings like yourself into blind allegiance through exaggerated tales of lead poisoning, global warming due to auto emmissions, and those pooor poooor wittle harp seals that get their wittle bwains bashed in by big mean seal hunters who want to sell coats to those evil women who wear fur.


The blinds will never see the light and always claim people in the "light", blinds.

It is so typical of weak debators: resorting to name calling. Can't you debate with facts? Appearantly, you think as well as you debate. 




> You should go back to hanging our with your PETA friends.


Sorry, can't be a hunter and in love with PETA at the same time.


----------



## sean

> Sorry, can't be a hunter and in love with PETA at the same time


no you cant especially if you want to sound like you have a shred of credibility you cant love something and also love those that hate you for it


----------



## huntfish25

FOR PETA is a group who is brain washing there members to do what they want them to believe. if you a part of peta or any other group like them you should be ban from here. 

there is no proff lead posin is kill birds. if anybody ever hunt and eat animals they have shot can tell you, "eating a peace of shot is common" i have eat it and so of many also. i ate rabbit, birds, and turkey with lead shot in it. you try not to but it happen. most animals die from other reason then gun shot. beleave me we wish we was that good but we are not. so to said animals eat dead animald and get lead posin is also wrong. most of us harvest our animals we kill. most dead animas get kill by cars on the road. then the scaveger get kill trying to eat them. we need to band cars more then lead in bullets.

about the tree being cut down. if you ever try to get out of the city and open your eyes. in maine there is all the trees you want to see. there is a place call big woods you can walk for 100mile ether way you want and never see another place. it all woods and they tell you if you get lost you are on your own they will not look for you.


----------



## sean

ban_t said:


> www.fws.gov/hoppermountain/cacondor/Pophistory.html
> After looking at this Population history from US Fish & Wildlife They only report of one death from lead. While the others ranged from Golden eagles, coyote, one shot & Power line electrocution. They Facts that they show is over a period from 2004-1982 In the Wild as of 12 January 2004
> 
> * Arizona = 40
> * Central California= 24
> * Southern California = 20
> * Baja, Mexico=5
> * Total = 89
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> did you even read this ? why arent we having mass die offs of other scavengers ? are condors hyper sensative to lead? some animals are just slated for extingsion you dont see a whole lot of whooly mamoth running around .............


----------



## sean

sean said:


> ban_t said:
> 
> 
> 
> www.fws.gov/hoppermountain/cacondor/Pophistory.html
> After looking at this Population history from US Fish & Wildlife They only report of one death from lead. While the others ranged from Golden eagles, coyote, one shot & Power line electrocution. They Facts that they show is over a period from 2004-1982 In the Wild as of 12 January 2004
> 
> * Arizona = 40
> * Central California= 24
> * Southern California = 20
> * Baja, Mexico=5
> * Total = 89
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> did you even read this ? why arent we having mass die offs of other scavengers ? are condors hyper sensative to lead? some animals are just slated for extingsion you dont see a whole lot of whooly mamoth running around .............
> 
> 
> 
> what about the coyotes that ate the condors did they die of lad poisoning also ?
Click to expand...


----------



## x-shocker

huntfish25 said:


> if anybody ever hunt and eat animals they have shot can tell you, "eating a peace of shot is common" i have eat it and so of many also. i ate rabbit, birds, and turkey with lead shot in it.


And that is one of my argument against lead. We should be able to eat with peace of mind. If a little lead paint is not good for us, can you imagine what a solid lead shot will do?



> if you ever try to get out of the city and open your eyes. in maine there is all the trees you want to see. there is a place call big woods you can walk for 100mile ether way you want and never see another place. it all woods and they tell you if you get lost you are on your own they will not look for you.


Wish I was driving down that road. Ain't nothing like a good nature drive, with a shotgun in tow: steel shots, ofcourse.:wink:


----------



## huntfish25

ddont used lead bullets. that is your choice. the lead paint issuewas deffert. first i dont know much about it. it could been the same thing what we having now. when you sale a home i dont care if it was built yester day you have to get it tested. why because you could have lead paint in it? what i do know is lids was picking the pant off the wals and eating for a long time. the lead in paint it also finers and that can get into your blood. 

dont buy lead bullets it call freedom you do not need the goverment to tell you want to do.


----------



## sean

huntfish25 said:


> ddont used lead bullets. that is your choice. the lead paint issuewas deffert. first i dont know much about it. it could been the same thing what we having now. when you sale a home i dont care if it was built yester day you have to get it tested. why because you could have lead paint in it? what i do know is lids was picking the pant off the wals and eating for a long time. the lead in paint it also finers and that can get into your blood.
> 
> dont buy lead bullets it call freedom you do not need the goverment to tell you want to do.


all center fire rifle and pistol ammunition with the few exotic exceptions contain lead including most military ball ammo .......barnes makes a copper rifle bullet and I know of no others that are lead free except perhaps the hevishot .224 rifle bullets and they contain tungsten cores .... so you seek to ban 99% of all single projectile cartridges 

shot shells on the other hand have become available readily with many types sizes and composition lead steel bismuth tungsten and some others so an outright lead ban would likely only do away with 75 % of all shotgun ammo 

so you leave the 26% of all types of ammo still on the table and how many of those will readily penetrate a bulletproof vest most all of it ....... they have been trying to ban all this stuff for years .......don't make it so easy to dismantle your sport 


I dont believe this condor crap for a second if it was true why does it only effect condors and not bald eagles or hawks we shoot ground squirrels with ballistic tips they are full of lead powder eagles and hawks eat all the squeekers they can stuff in their bellies and you don't see them stacked like cord wood dead all over the fields ......


----------



## P_R

x-shocker said:


> Sure, lead comes from Mother Earth, but does She mold it into grit size balls and throws them onto Her skin for the little birdies to pick up because they need grits to crush their food? Does She injects these lead balls into animal parts and leave them on Her skin for scavangers to eat?


You betray your whacko leanings with references to "Mother Earth" and refering to the planet as "She".  

The point you made previously was that lead is going back into the ground. Now you're upset about the lead killing "the little birdies". Which is it? Are your "little birdies" any more dead because they we shot with lead rather than steel? Oh, the horror!! The logical explanation for this apparent inconsistancy is that their real goal is to work toward the eventual prohibition on weapons/hunting. The eco-industry just loves power. And people on power trips don't like others to be armed and independent. That's the end game. You're just what Lenin refered to as a "useful idiot". You've got good intentions, but you can't see the forest for the trees. Government takes our freedom little by little with cries of "let's do it for the children", "if it saves just one life, isn't it worth it" and images of little birds eating lead grit and dying horrible deaths. But it's not about the environment. It's about increasing government control over every aspect of our lives. We've got freon bans, guns bans, rules against riding in the back of pickup trucks, and laws about recording the use of products like sudafed - it's all about control. Lenin knew this and he used people like you to help him implement his plans. Millions wound up dead as a result.

If you're happy and you know it, rattle your chains!




x-shocker said:


> The blinds will never see the light and always claim people in the "light", blinds.
> 
> It is so typical of weak debators: resorting to name calling. Can't you debate with facts? Appearantly, you think as well as you debate.


First you get on your highhorse and call me blind. Then you talk about weak debators resorting to name calling. HAHAHA!!! Can't you see the irony there?? 

I was talking about the excesses of the environmental lobby. You didn't address any of my points. So why don't you take your own advise and debate the facts instead of insulting like you do in the last sentence referencing my thinking and debating skill.




x-shocker said:


> Sorry, can't be a hunter and in love with PETA at the same time.


I think you're a PETA plant. Consider yourself outed and go back to your tofu burger.


----------



## huntfish25

if bird is die from lead posin shw me the facts?

if animals are dieing from lead posin show me the facts?

if the lead is comming from guns show us the facts?

i have never read any where the number of animals die from lead posin then any other problem. i think cars is killing more animals then guns.

show us the facts or shut up


----------



## sean

huntfish25 said:


> if bird is die from lead posin shw me the facts?
> 
> if animals are dieing from lead posin show me the facts?
> 
> if the lead is comming from guns show us the facts?
> 
> i have never read any where the number of animals die from lead posin then any other problem. i think cars is killing more animals then guns.
> 
> show us the facts or shut up





I would venture to say that in our area more ***** squirels rabbits coyotes die from cars than hunters I see hundreds of dead silver grey squirels dead on the road and they have no hunting pressure cuz its illegal to shoot one


----------



## huntfish25

sean said:


> I would venture to say that in our area more ***** squirels rabbits coyotes die from cars than hunters I see hundreds of dead silver grey squirels dead on the road and they have no hunting pressure cuz its illegal to shoot one



i will have to said the same with deer around here. on my way to work i see about 2-3 deer every day dead and that just a small way i cant imange on every major high way


----------



## x-shocker

P_R said:


> You betray your whacko leanings with references to "Mother Earth" and refering to the planet as "She".
> 
> The point you made previously was that lead is going back into the ground. Now you're upset about the lead killing "the little birdies". Which is it? Are your "little birdies" any more dead because they we shot with lead rather than steel? Oh, the horror!! The logical explanation for this apparent inconsistancy is that their real goal is to work toward the eventual prohibition on weapons/hunting. The eco-industry just loves power. And people on power trips don't like others to be armed and independent. That's the end game. You're just what Lenin refered to as a "useful idiot". You've got good intentions, but you can't see the forest for the trees. Government takes our freedom little by little with cries of "let's do it for the children", "if it saves just one life, isn't it worth it" and images of little birds eating lead grit and dying horrible deaths. But it's not about the environment. It's about increasing government control over every aspect of our lives. We've got freon bans, guns bans, rules against riding in the back of pickup trucks, and laws about recording the use of products like sudafed - it's all about control. Lenin knew this and he used people like you to help him implement his plans. Millions wound up dead as a result.
> 
> If you're happy and you know it, rattle your chains!
> 
> 
> 
> First you get on your highhorse and call me blind. Then you talk about weak debators resorting to name calling. HAHAHA!!! Can't you see the irony there??
> 
> I was talking about the excesses of the environmental lobby. You didn't address any of my points. So why don't you take your own advise and debate the facts instead of insulting like you do in the last sentence referencing my thinking and debating skill.
> 
> 
> 
> I think you're a PETA plant. Consider yourself outed and go back to your tofu burger.



Grow up, boy!


----------



## huntfish25

x-shocker said:


> Grow up, boy!



tell us do you suport PETA?


----------



## x-shocker

huntfish25 said:


> tell us do you suport PETA?


I do not support idiots, no matter which side of the fence.


----------



## ban_t

x-shocker said:


> I do not support idiots, no matter which side of the fence.


Well glad you answered that. 
I think that too most we do, too littlle too late, we take one thing and use it twist too the advanage of the agenda that we want. Call it SPIN. As far as the lead debate goes. You may win the adgenda due too spin and good media. People recoginize Lead since it has been a varying problem thru out the US. Kids ate it, Why mom and dad did not watch them. DDT killed everything. So what do we do ban it all. Without really understanding what it is really doing. (yess DDT was really bad stuff ) Absestos really good stuff except in power form. Otherwise great. We can debate all this stuff, but lead bullets are not the major cause of condor deaths. So you or anyone else cannot use it as good excuse too ban it. Unless it is used as a excuse to futher a differnt agenda. As humans we do things that at the time may seem right, Then after many years we find that may not have been such a good idea. Lead works, even after all the years it may have led too a few case's of problem but it the spin that makes it bad. DDT is what it was nothing but bad for everyone. Absestos great stuff except in powder form. 
The bottom line is if you look at the true facts X you are wrong, and do not have the proof too prove right just spin and Hype about lead and Condors. 
I just think we should think about actions and chose the best course we feel fit not having everyone else telling us the facts are as they see them. 
We can see, if given all the facts not facts they want us too see. 

Knowledge is our best weapon when use with our brain.
If you feel you need too pick me apart after this that is okay I am trhu with this debate since it is done for me I found the facts I needed too make a clear choice and Lead is fine for use in bullets. 
Enough said :zip:

http://www.cdc.gov/nceh/lead/surv/stats.htm

http://www.cdc.gov/nceh/lead/Legislation%20&%20Policy/State%20Lead%20Statutes%20Jan%205,%202005%20NCSL.PDF


----------



## archerm3

ubetcha said:


> Two points that need to be corrcted are
> 1) *military rounds are copper coated steel bullets*2) R-134a when used in a vehicle designed to use R-12 does not cool very well due to the size and design of it,s componets.This happens when a system is retro fitted to use R-134a.The new systems that use R-134a are using smaller hose sizes and redesigned componets to function efficently


Sorry, you are extremely incorrect sir. Copper coated lead. Some bullets have a steel "pin" inside the lead. Not all. Some bullets have depleted uranium. Not all.


----------



## archerm3

I cant believe that no one has brought up the point that lead wont necessarily kill you to be harmful. Or any other animal for that matter. It causes birth defects and sterility. Oh I'm sorry, it was either a college educated professor or a government agency that told me that it must be wrong. Because I only listen to scientists when it suits my purpose, not because the scientific method was used correctly and proven. You guys must be right because your education stopped about halfway through high school.

So to all you chicken littles out there that don't trust scientists, professors, engineers, doctors, teachers... if X * X = 25 what is the answer? Is it five? are you sure? Do you want to believe an engineer (which I am)? Is there only one answer to that question? 

Originally Posted by gmbellew 
all i will say on this subject (although it is valid for many) is only a fool would not critically question the things around them. 

Yes ok, for the things he doesnt understand. Did you question your grade school teacher when she said 6 + 6 = 12? But that isnt the answer if your not counting in base 10. If you dont know your frame of reference, then shut up if you dont know what your talking about, listen to those who are already in the know, dont ask question until youve heard the whole story, and in the end your gonna have to put a little trust in the people that actually know what they're talking about. 

YES YOU GOTTA WATCH OUT FOR THE DANG ENVIRONMENTALISTS TAKING AWAY OUR FREEDOMS. Im not on their side. But not everything they say is wrong or bad or infringing on your rights. Just like not every hunter or driver is full of virtue and without reproach. Naw, we dont have any poachers. Poachers aren't a reason for me to get pissed off about rising permit costs, or being hassled in the parking lot by the warden, or restrictive game check procedures. yeah right. And we dont hunt for sport, only to put food on the table. yeah right. I only hunt to control the deer population from getting hit on Interstate 80.. yeah right.

To those of you who are on the fence on this issue, I applaud you. Thats fine. What I am saying is don't go screaming with lunatic rants to the NRA, Pheasants Forever, Ducks Unlimited, RMEF, and whatever proponents of our lifestyle. It makes us look like fools and makes all of our arguments look less credible. This study has an air of legitimacy to it, from my perspective, as a college educated engineer, former government worker, and perpetual student of science. 

Maybe everyone else can chime in on why they think they are qualified to their opinion, other than "welss Iza hunts and Iza works all days long for furty yearz ands ands Iza been on dis heres computers forms for longestzx ands Iza knowz betters tans everysones esle."

You know when I worry about my hunting rights and my gun ownership rights, I worry more about the loudmouth idiots we have on our side more than the foo-foo panzies on the PETA/AHS side. The majority of the population of this country still believes we have a right to hunt and own guns, we dont need to be our own worse enemy by making fantastic statements about science and being difficult to work with trying to help an endangered species make a comeback.


----------



## archerm3

sean said:


> sean said:
> 
> 
> 
> what about the coyotes that ate the condors did they die of lad poisoning also ?
> 
> 
> 
> Coyotes are not endangered
Click to expand...


----------



## archerm3

sean said:


> all center fire rifle and pistol ammunition with the few exotic exceptions contain lead including most military ball ammo .......barnes makes a copper rifle bullet and I know of no others that are lead snip
> 
> I dont believe this condor crap for a second if it was true why does it only effect condors and not bald eagles or hawks we shoot ground squirrels with ballistic tips they are full of lead powder eagles and hawks eat all the squeekers they can stuff in their bellies and you don't see them stacked like cord wood dead all over the fields ......


Bald eagles.. not endangered
Hawks, not endangered
Ground squirrels, not endangered


----------



## archerm3

sean said:


> did you even read this ? why arent we having mass die offs of other scavengers ? are condors hyper sensative to lead? *some animals are just slated for extingsion you dont see a whole lot of whooly mamoth running around .............*


See this is the kind of statements that set the middle of the road general voting population of this country against our case. Some non hunter dude in Chicago (or any other major metropolitan area with way more voting power than a rural area), never hunted but understands the history of it and doesn't mind it, hears a this statement and thinks.....On one side, I have a group of people trying to save a rare animal that only exists in my awesome country (patriotic grin) on the other hand I have a group of ******** (Hey, Im one too, Im just saying thats how we are often perceived) that dont want to help out, in fact just want to let the thing die so they can hunt for 10 dollars a box of ammo a year cheaper, in fact this group of ******** is proud of the fact of more animals going extinct and thinks its funny. 

This aint a way to win a war people.


----------



## archerm3

huntfish25 said:


> let me tell you about car ac system the R134 dont work as good as the R12. i work on both cars and trucks. i was one of the first shop who was robben the custmers of $1000's to change everything for the new system. that why i left the shop. i work at the dealer ship when the new car cam off the line with the freon and you can barry get it down in the 40º mark. i made a gauge set so you can put R134 in the old cars so they did not have to change everything like every one wanted. i dont know who is feeden this stuff to you but if you ever find anybody who work on the old system they will all tell you r12 is the best there is and the new stuff it works but not as good and it will never will. you cant not get one person to prove to you it was the fren that was doing the damage. the best thing happen in this i made alot of money and so did every one else. ac check up *sale from $9.99 in 1986 to $49.99 in 1989. ac repair averge from $50 1986 to $300 *that goverment in action


Average cost of car, 1986 around $12000
2007 around 25000

Average cost of transmission repair, 1986 $300 TH350
today, $2000 4L60E

You wanna try real estate?? didn't think so
How about groceries? Look up Top Sirloin, Milk, and Kraft Mac and cheese. 

Thats just inflation dude. And it aint no 4 percent.
Though I do agree with you, R134 does have slightly less cooling qualities than R12. And I agree, it has been suggested that R134 is harmful to the ozone as well. But you mention that scientists have contradictory evidence on either coolant causing ozone damage and global warming? Do we really want to take that chance if it is true?? Nobody cares about R12 anymore. We've gotten through the painful expensive years, now mostly any car that anyone would care about putting R12 in is a collector car that gonna stay in the garage anyways.


----------



## archerm3

ban_t said:


> www.fws.gov/hoppermountain/cacondor/Pophistory.html
> After looking at this Population history from US Fish & Wildlife They only report of one death from lead. While the others ranged from Golden eagles, coyote, one shot & Power line electrocution. They Facts that they show is over a period from 2004-1982 In the Wild as of 12 January 2004
> 
> * Arizona = 40
> * Central California= 24
> * Southern California = 20
> * Baja, Mexico=5
> * Total = 89
> 
> 
> 
> In Captivity as of 12 January 2004
> 
> * World Center Birds of Prey = 41
> * Los Angeles Zoo = 26
> * San Diego Wild Animal Park = 22
> Portland Zoo = 12
> * Field pens/awaiting release= 25
> * Total = 126
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Deaths since 1998
> 
> * 1998 = 5
> * 1999 = 7
> * 2000 = 16
> * 2001 = 5
> * 2002 = 7
> * 2003 = 11
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Total Population as of 12 January 2004 =215
> Revised:January 01, 2004
> California Condor Recovery Program
> 
> Hmmmmmmmm I think we should remove the power lines too that seems too have killed more condors than lead.



Wait, thats government info. I'm not sure I should believe that...:boink: :nono:


----------



## littleyellow

You're wasting your time....some people don't like education. Ignorance is bliss.


----------



## huntfish25

arch3 i dont think a person in this room will wont any animal to die off. i also think the endager specie act was a great thing teddy rosevelt started that help alot of animals and since it started no animal that i know of has been put on there from over hunting. when a animals get put on the list it wont come off, this is why i dont want the polar bear to be put on the list. just look in the last 30 years, people went crazy when whales was taking of the list, the blad eagle, and many other animals, they said they will die off if that happen. i agread we should stick togather but fighting over this issue is not sticking togather. if you or somebody in here have proff prove us wrong show it but i dont beleave a bunch of people who wants to stop us from hunting and take away our guns. they have no problem to cause our ammo to rised and then take it away. 

if you look at other countries only the rich can aford to hunt this country is follow the foot steps. there is no proff that lead poisin is coming from bullets or shot, it could easy come from the water they drink. here in maryland they have lead poisin proble from the drinking water. fix that first!!


----------



## sean

archerm3 said:


> Average cost of car, 1986 around $12000
> 2007 around 25000
> 
> Average cost of transmission repair, 1986 $300 TH350
> today, $2000 4L60E
> 
> You wanna try real estate?? didn't think so
> How about groceries? Look up Top Sirloin, Milk, and Kraft Mac and cheese.
> 
> Thats just inflation dude. And it aint no 4 percent.
> Though I do agree with you, R134 does have slightly less cooling qualities than R12. And I agree, it has been suggested that R134 is harmful to the ozone as well. But you mention that scientists have contradictory evidence on either coolant causing ozone damage and global warming? Do we really want to take that chance if it is true?? Nobody cares about R12 anymore. We've gotten through the painful expensive years, now mostly any car that anyone would care about putting R12 in is a collector car that gonna stay in the garage anyways.


our shop still repairs and services r12 equiped vehicles all the time


----------



## sweryap

I might get flamed for saying this, but am I the only one that thinks its stupid to spend millions of dollars on legislation and research on saving the california condor? Aren't there more important things that California should be worrying about, like things that affect people rather than an almost extinct bird? This is not to say that I dislike the condor, I am sure they are nice birds but is there a point where you say I guess the bird can't hack it in the 21st century?


----------



## huntfish25

sweryap said:


> I might get flamed for saying this, but am I the only one that thinks its stupid to spend millions of dollars on legislation and research on saving the california condor? Aren't there more important things that California should be worrying about, like things that affect people rather than an almost extinct bird? This is not to say that I dislike the condor, I am sure they are nice birds but is there a point where you say I guess the bird can't hack it in the 21st century?


i not just goverment it our money they get from our lic and taxes.


----------



## archerm3

sweryap said:


> I might get flamed for saying this, but am I the only one that thinks its stupid to spend millions of dollars on legislation and research on saving the california condor? Aren't there more important things that California should be worrying about, like things that affect people rather than an almost extinct bird? This is not to say that I dislike the condor, I am sure they are nice birds but is there *a point where you say I guess the bird can't hack it in the 21st century*?


Yeah just read my post above, go ahead and SAY THAT QUOTE THAT I BOLDED on national TV, and then tell them youre a hunter, and see how far that gets our cause. 

I dont know the details on the exact dollars spent but I would venture to say that the California state government is wouldnt spend millions of dollars on a project that the citizens felt was not worthwhile and would cost somebody an election or their job. Remember, ARNIE is on our side and hes the governor. I dont see anyone on this thread that actually is from california, the only ones who are probably really qualified to even say anything on this issue. Is there anyone here that is really gonna be affected by this? Some 1000 acre hunting plot in southern california, cant use lead bullets??? Come on, no one is taking any hunting rights away. I stated earlier but apparently nobody read it.....IT WOULD BE CHEAPER FOR THE STATE TO JUST BAN HUNTING IN THE AREA ANYWAYS. Your talking maybe $50000 in signage and 300 manhours in patrolling. 

Research projects are not always funded by government dollars. Where do you think all that greenpeace, Peta, humane society donation money goes to? Just like Huntfishys allegation that scientists bend their results to suit whomever it was that gave them the money??????

And lastly, yes human programs are more important than wildlife programs to SOME people. But that doesn't mean you drop EVERYTHING until the ONE program you have an interest in is full and complete. Thats a sure fire way to get fired. Or recalled. Just like the previous governor of California. 

Sorry swery but your statement just illustrated my points further.


----------



## archerm3

huntfish25 said:


> arch3 i dont think a person in this room will wont any animal to die off. i also think the endager specie act was a great thing teddy rosevelt started that help alot of animals and since it started no animal that i know of has been put on there from over hunting. when a animals get put on the list it wont come off, this is why i dont want the polar bear to be put on the list. just *look in the last 30 years, people went crazy when whales was taking of the list, the blad eagle, and many other animals*, they said they will die off if that happen. i agread we should stick togather but fighting over this issue is not sticking togather. if you or somebody in here have proff prove us wrong show it but i dont beleave a bunch of people who wants to stop us from hunting and take away our guns. they have no problem to cause our ammo to rised and then take it away.
> 
> if you look at other countries only the rich can aford to hunt this country is follow the foot steps. there is no proff that lead poisin is coming from bullets or shot, it could easy come from the water they drink. here in maryland they have lead poisin proble from the drinking water. fix that first!!



See, you just said that "many" animals can be taken off the list quite easily. Sure someone might complain, something similar to what,,,,,a hunter complaining about ammo prices? Come to nebraska and see how many bald eagles there are. They like sparrows, its not even a big deal to see one, since I was a little kid. 

So, lets talk about the cost of hunting in this country. We caused that ourselves, by preaching the virtues of the sport to the wealthy baby boomers looking for a fun pastime after their 15 years of hard work making way more money than they deserve, now they are buying hunting land and hunting equipment up like crazy, causing prices in all areas to explode. I hunted for 3 years in Germany, I still have my lifetime license. It is getting more expensive to hunt here, in some areas, than there. Over there it doesnt take any money to hunt once you've purchased your license once, and pay your yearly liability insurance at a bout 200 bucks per year. 
But look at all facets of this country. Our cost of living is going through the roof. Its not just hunting. Its golf, little league, racing, entertainment, health care, real estate. Everything is getting out of reach of the common man. Its not just hunting.

And I see that you admit that lead is a poison when injested due to the maryland water pollution. But lead is in the ground where the water is, it shouldn't mix.


----------



## sweryap

archerm3 said:


> Yeah just read my post above, go ahead and SAY THAT QUOTE THAT I BOLDED on national TV, and then tell them youre a hunter, and see how far that gets our cause.
> 
> I dont know the details on the exact dollars spent but I would venture to say that the California state government is wouldnt spend millions of dollars on a project that the citizens felt was not worthwhile and would cost somebody an election or their job. Remember, ARNIE is on our side and hes the governor. I dont see anyone on this thread that actually is from california, the only ones who are probably really qualified to even say anything on this issue. Is there anyone here that is really gonna be affected by this? Some 1000 acre hunting plot in southern california, cant use lead bullets??? Come on, no one is taking any hunting rights away. I stated earlier but apparently nobody read it.....IT WOULD BE CHEAPER FOR THE STATE TO JUST BAN HUNTING IN THE AREA ANYWAYS. Your talking maybe $50000 in signage and 300 manhours in patrolling.
> 
> Research projects are not always funded by government dollars. Where do you think all that greenpeace, Peta, humane society donation money goes to? Just like Huntfishys allegation that scientists bend their results to suit whomever it was that gave them the money??????
> 
> And lastly, yes human programs are more important than wildlife programs to SOME people. But that doesn't mean you drop EVERYTHING until the ONE program you have an interest in is full and complete. Thats a sure fire way to get fired. Or recalled. Just like the previous governor of California.
> 
> Sorry swery but your statement just illustrated my points further.



Lol that last sentence I wrote was not quite literal. You talk of California as if its an island to itself and is apart from the other states of the union. Where does most of their power come from, their funds for highways, their water, where do their illegal immigrants go? These are just a few examples of how california effects more than californians. I agree with you that banning hunting in that area might be the best solution, but I would like to see how much money taxpayers are paying to save this bird. If most of its coming from private sources, then save it all you want! But if its coming from taxpayers thats a different story. There is no reason a bird is more important than people.


----------



## huntfish25

archerm3 said:


> *See, you just said that "many" animals can be taken off the list quite easily. * Sure someone might complain, something similar to what,,,,,a hunter complaining about ammo prices? Come to nebraska and see how many bald eagles there are. They like sparrows, its not even a big deal to see one, since I was a little kid.
> 
> So, lets talk about the cost of hunting in this country. We caused that ourselves, by preaching the virtues of the sport to the wealthy baby boomers looking for a fun pastime after their 15 years of hard work making way more money than they deserve, now they are buying hunting land and hunting equipment up like crazy, causing prices in all areas to explode. I hunted for 3 years in Germany, I still have my lifetime license. It is getting more expensive to hunt here, in some areas, than there. Over there it doesnt take any money to hunt once you've purchased your license once, and pay your yearly liability insurance at a bout 200 bucks per year.
> But look at all facets of this country. Our cost of living is going through the roof. Its not just hunting. Its golf, little league, racing, entertainment, health care, real estate. Everything is getting out of reach of the common man. Its not just hunting.
> 
> And I see that you admit that lead is a poison when injested due to the maryland water pollution. But lead is in the ground where the water is, it shouldn't mix.




no did not said it easy get off the list! it almost inposable to get off the endanger list. thye bald eagle will still be on the list if it was not a bunch of people said our nation bird is endanger. we do not hunt them. for the whale they still want it back on the list. the endanger list has do more harm then any thing else. they have stop progressed just because somebody yell there is a rat endanger. some animals is endanger not because there number are low, there is animals that will never get off the list because where they are located they will not survive anywhere else. for one is the key deer, where there number will never grow because they are in a small area. i think we should protect them but to stop the world because of one is stupid. the endager list has become the goverment stop progressed i have seen it with my own eyes and if some of you open yours you will see it. this lead bullet issue is the perfect expil. this is why we dont have leaded gas now.


----------



## x-shocker

huntfish25 said:


> the endager list has become the goverment stop progressed i have seen it with my own eyes and if some of you open yours you will see it. this lead bullet issue is the perfect expil. this is why we dont have leaded gas now.


Thank the government for banning leaded gasoline. If you realized that lead in drinking water is a problem, then you should also know that leaded gasoline produced similiar problems.


----------



## thh058

we should all just start hunting with wooden spears...


----------



## huntfish25

thh058 said:


> we should all just start hunting with wooden spears...



they they cry the tree is a endanger and trees harm animals. the only lead posin animals i see is when my bullets hit them. they also get copper posin, steel posin and even broad head posin that is the worst kind.


----------



## GCOD

look the bottom line is lead is not a good thing personally i use barnes tsx bullets ,they are more expensive but hey what hobby is cheap remember hunters are the ultimate conservationists

YOU HAVE TO PAY TO PLAY


----------



## thh058

GCOD said:


> look the bottom line is lead is not a good thing personally i use barnes tsx bullets ,they are more expensive but hey what hobby is cheap remember hunters are the ultimate conservationists
> 
> YOU HAVE TO PAY TO PLAY


that's fine and dandy, but what happens when nobody can afford to hunt?!?

missouri is going to go to non toxic shot for doves next year in some ca's. i find it hard to believe the dove population is being decimated by doves eating lead pellets! even if the population is decreasing...how about lowering the limit to compensate instead of making hunting them much more expensive... 

lowering the limit would mean less doves killed, and less shots being fired to limit out...


----------



## huntfish25

GCOD said:


> look the bottom line is lead is not a good thing personally i use barnes tsx bullets ,they are more expensive but hey what hobby is cheap remember hunters are the ultimate conservationists
> 
> YOU HAVE TO PAY TO PLAY


no the bottom line is there is no proff that there is a lead posin problem. this is comtrol us. they are using a possablty that one bird got lead posin and they want us to pay for it. what next copper, steel any thing else. you be the one crying that we are not allow to hunt and you are the cause of the problem


----------



## ban_t

sweryap said:


> Lol that last sentence I wrote was not quite literal. You talk of California as if its an island to itself and is apart from the other states of the union. Where does most of their power come from, their funds for highways, their water, where do their illegal immigrants go? These are just a few examples of how california effects more than californians. I agree with you that banning hunting in that area might be the best solution, but I would like to see how much money taxpayers are paying to save this bird. If most of its coming from private sources, then save it all you want! But if its coming from taxpayers thats a different story. There is no reason a bird is more important than people.


Here is a little FYI for some who wonder how much we spend (Tax Dollars). Not just California and everyone's freind Arnold.
http://www.doi.gov/news/030528a.htm
_"Congress provided a total of $6 million in the FY 2003 to designate critical habitat for already listed species, nearly two-thirds of the $9.077 million budget for the Service's endangered species listing program. The Service estimates the total cost of complying with all court orders and court-approved settlement agreements requiring the Service to work on critical habitat for already listed species in FY 2003 to be approximately $8 million, leaving a shortfall of $2 million.

"Spending more than two-thirds of our listing budget on critical habitat for already listed species flies in the face of logic and the intent of the Endangered Species Act. We need to make decisions about how to use our limited resources based on the most urgent needs of species, not on who can get into a courtroom first," Manson said."_ Too Read the entire report just follow the link. 

Now Granted this is just a tip of the Iceburg, with all the Enviro's Trying too get a piece of the puzzle. 
People have lost their land, employment and our basic rights. It is never about One state, It is about the United States. California is just 1/50th. It also one of the most Liberal or Social States that we have. 
So If you want the Gov't too control everything then move too California. The Politicians will gladly do that at all at a COST TOO YOU.ukey: 
*
o o Originally Posted by archerm3 View Post

I dont know the details on the exact dollars spent but I would venture to say that the California state government is wouldnt spend millions of dollars on a project that the citizens felt was not worthwhile and would cost somebody an election or their job. Remember, ARNIE is on our side and hes the governor. I dont see anyone on this thread that actually is from california, the only ones who are probably really qualified to even say anything on this issue. Is there anyone here that is really gonna be affected by this? Some 1000 acre hunting plot in southern california, cant use lead bullets??? Come on, nne is taking any hunting rights away. I stated earlier but apparently nobody read it.....IT WOULD BE CHEAPER FOR THE STATE TO JUST BAN HUNTING IN THE AREA ANYWAYS. Your talking maybe $50000 in signage and 300 manhours in patrolling.
*
To Help you Out a little Here is the buget. I did not read it since I do not live there and I have not right too say anything about that States budget. I do agree with that, But do you? Federal Money I have a right, So I make this post
http://www.dfg.ca.gov/dfgbudget/06-07/DFG_BFB_2006_07.pdf 

That way you will Know what is going on. Knowledge is our best defense. The question I would ask myself is where do they get the 50,000 + labor costs to protect the property. Yes it is US. THAT IS WHY ARNIE WILL GO FOR IT. 
We just have too remember that every State will affect the next. HMMMMMMMM Sounds like a theory Hmmmmmmm Einstien was it; Every Reaction has a equal and opposite reaction. Just Some Things Too Ponder:darkbeer:


----------



## goosehunter2118

More BS. One bullet buried 10' in the ground isn't gonna hurt anything but worms (and the deer it killed a slit second before that). Let's get real here. Unless they want to pay for my tungsten bullets, they can stick it. Lead will be coming out my .243 until I die. And before anyone says anything, I follow ALL of the rules, but if this one passes, it will be a sad day for hunters and I have a feeling many will shoot lead anyway.


----------



## archerm3

ban_t said:


> Here is a little FYI for some who wonder how much we spend (Tax Dollars). Not just California and everyone's freind Arnold.
> snip..
> We just have too remember that every State will affect the next. HMMMMMMMM Sounds like a theory Hmmmmmmm Einstien was it; Every Reaction has a equal and opposite reaction. Just Some Things Too Ponder:darkbeer:


That was Isaac Newton, his third law of motion, and has to do with physical bodies in motion, not with sociology.

I still think you guys are making a mountain out of molehill on this lead ban near condors. I suppose the guy that brought up lead shot for dove hunting in Missouri is a much more worthy cause. But it is a migratory bird so thats how they are getting in on that. Has anyone here written anything beyond this board to anyone in a government position about their feelings on this lead issue?


----------



## archerm3

thh058 said:


> that's fine and dandy, but what happens when nobody can afford to hunt?!?
> 
> missouri is going to go to non toxic shot for doves next year in some ca's. i find it hard to believe the dove population is being decimated by doves eating lead pellets! even if the population is decreasing...how about lowering the limit to compensate instead of making hunting them much more expensive...
> 
> lowering the limit would mean less doves killed, and less shots being fired to limit out...


This dove hunting issue is a more worthy topic of this lead ban than the condors... But if its only in certain counties (??ca's??) that would lead me to believe that it has something to do with waterfowl density during the migration than with actual doves eating the lead shot.


----------



## archerm3

thh058 said:


> that's fine and dandy, *but what happens when nobody can afford to hunt?!?*
> missouri is going to go to non toxic shot for doves next year in some ca's. i find it hard to believe the dove population is being decimated by doves eating lead pellets! even if the population is decreasing...how about lowering the limit to compensate instead of making hunting them much more expensive...
> 
> lowering the limit would mean less doves killed, and less shots being fired to limit out...


The rich will be the only ones who can afford to hunt. Its coming in this country and its our own fault by growing the sports popularity. What are we going to do when nobody can afford to buy farmland??? Only the rich successful farmers or corporations can afford farmland today. What are we going to do when new cars are too expensive??? Only the rich will afford them. These arguments will not work and are only valid point in the discussion of the politics of economy. (BTW our economy is quickly turning into that of Victorian England and prerevolutionary France with the large income inequity in todays workplace) IT WILL GARNER NO SUPPORT FOR OUR CAUSE TO CLAIM WE CANT AFFORD TO HUNT. Its already cheaper to buy a side of beef than to buy equipment, license, gas, to go deer hunting. Unless you can hunt in your backyard with a bow you made from a tree in your back yard. Now you got to own land for that..WHO CAN AFFORD TO BUY INTO LAND LIKE THIS NOWADAYS?? Not me. But people that can afford a brand new SUV AND PICKUP in the driveway, can afford a box of $20 shells.


----------



## sean

archerm3 said:


> The rich will be the only ones who can afford to hunt. Its coming in this country and its our own fault by growing the sports popularity. What are we going to do when nobody can afford to buy farmland??? Only the rich successful farmers or corporations can afford farmland today. What are we going to do when new cars are too expensive??? Only the rich will afford them. These arguments will not work and are only valid point in the discussion of the politics of economy. (BTW our economy is quickly turning into that of Victorian England and prerevolutionary France with the large income inequity in todays workplace) IT WILL GARNER NO SUPPORT FOR OUR CAUSE TO CLAIM WE CANT AFFORD TO HUNT. Its already cheaper to buy a side of beef than to buy equipment, license, gas, to go deer hunting. Unless you can hunt in your backyard with a bow you made from a tree in your back yard. Now you got to own land for that..WHO CAN AFFORD TO BUY INTO LAND LIKE THIS NOWADAYS?? Not me. But people that can afford a brand new SUV AND PICKUP in the driveway, can afford a box of $20 shells.



I make and lube and size my own lead bullets for competition keeps them cheap enough to practice 10,000 rds a year I have 3 lead furnaces and several thousand pounds of ingots should I give it all up ?


----------



## huntfish25

sean said:


> I make and lube and size my own lead bullets for competition keeps them cheap enough to practice 10,000 rds a year I have 3 lead furnaces and several thousand pounds of ingots should I give it all up ?



this is the point you will not be able to make you own bullets. it just like global warming there is no proff but we all suffer from it. they make laws for one area and then they make every one follow it. it dont matter if it cantain you or not. the antis tell you take little bits out of freedom and the rest will follow. this thread alone is proff. we have a few in here who beleave this with a little proff and they are willing to jump in. there is no proff that any condor has die from lead poisin and it came from a bullet or a shot but they are willing to give up all lead used. with all the lead bullets that been used for 1000 year birds will been gone by now. there is no proff unless somebody in here has some that ducks and goose was getting lead posin from shot


----------



## archerm3

sean said:


> I make and lube and size my own lead bullets for competition keeps them cheap enough to practice 10,000 rds a year I have 3 lead furnaces and several thousand pounds of ingots should I give it all up ?



Yes I suppose you should if you're too dense to see how this condor thing is affecting you in any way other than the magical domino theory of the antihunters. Yeah that domino theory held water during the cold war didnt it???? BTW, what are you hunting with solid wadcutter bullets?? These bans are in no way affecting your ability to target shoot. Only thing I can see from target shooting rights is that OSHA is requiring indoor ranges to provide better ventilation from lead dust that many ranges CHOOSE NOT TO PAY FOR. 

What, do you want a medal for your superhuman lead bullet casting resources? Wish I could afford 3 furnaces and 2000 + pounds of ingots and all the money towards powder and surely hundreds of dollars in gas you spend going to the tournaments that cost you 10000s of shots per year. 

If you choose to wear the hat of a victim, that is how you will be treated.

How many animals are you killing per year? And why cant you afford 4 dollars per animal shot? You are certainly spending more than that on arrows, and if you expect an arrow to survive more than one kill shot you are being unrealistic. 

HUNTFISH I have no clue what youre trying to say in your last post. Your ANGLISH is unusually bad in that one. 

Im sorry that some of you were expecting a uniform comiseration party on this topic.


----------



## archerm3

HUNTFISH, you apparently got all this environmental stuff all figured out so why have you not applied to be the national EPA chief??


----------



## huntfish25

archerm3 said:


> Yes I suppose you should if you're too dense to see how this condor thing is affecting you in any way other than the magical domino theory of the antihunters. Yeah that domino theory held water during the cold war didnt it???? BTW, what are you hunting with solid wadcutter bullets?? These bans are in no way affecting your ability to target shoot. *Only thing I can see from target shooting rights is that OSHA is requiring indoor ranges to provide better ventilation from lead dust that many ranges *CHOOSE NOT TO PAY FOR.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sorry that my gramer and spelling is bad. this is the puplice school system at work. the goverment is at the out door range also and it get to them closer then you know it. they are using the lead posin animals to do it. some states are making the out door range stripping the shootiing buirs or mounds and not disposed that dirt in a hazer wasted. i dont know if you figure out a few tons of hazerd dirt may coast thousand of dollars to get rid of. so some ranges will go under. my place coast me $35 a year and it been there in the 40's it could caost us $150 a year in a blink of a eye if this law comes to my state. it will just take another law said no shooting at all. alot of miltary bases are already doing this so i know what i am saying.
> 
> the little laws is what is killing us becuase it take small bits out of us. just like the lead ban for water foul. it started just in small area then it move to water shedes, then any duck and goose hunting, now it doves, it will soon be small games. they are already talking about making skeet clubs to strinp there shoot range from all the shots that shoot at the ranges. can you inmange having you hobby of sport skeet shooting went from $3 box - $10box skeet shoot will die over night. golf has realized that being a rich man sport is not a proffabl sport that why they are starting to get new people in. in some country it coast $1000 just to hunt that why only few people hunts and that why england has ban fox hunting there was not enough of people doing it to stop it. that could be us. our number are dropping and every one we lose is a less vote we have. people dont suport what they dont do.
> 
> you tell us how many animals die from lead poisen?
Click to expand...


----------



## x-shocker

huntfish25 said:


> you tell us how many animals die from lead poisen?


If a tree falls, in a forest, and no one is around to see it, wouldn't the forest still be one less tree?

Do you need to see all the dead animals or will just some do? It will be hard to show you all the lead poisoned animals.

There was a case involving a kid from Minneapolis (within the last year) who swallowed a charm from a bracelet and died. The charm turned out to be pure lead and that killed the boy very quickly. I believe the charm bracelet was packaged with Nike shoes. Yes, I know, I know... lead only kills kids and not animals...


----------



## Yellowfin

> sorry that my gramer and spelling is bad. this is the puplice school system at work. the goverment is at the out door range also and it get to them closer then you know it. they are using the lead posin animals to do it. some states are making the out door range stripping the shootiing buirs or mounds and not disposed that dirt in a hazer wasted. i dont know if you figure out a few tons of hazerd dirt may coast thousand of dollars to get rid of. so some ranges will go under. my place coast me $35 a year and it been there in the 40's it could caost us $150 a year in a blink of a eye if this law comes to my state. it will just take another law said no shooting at all. alot of miltary bases are already doing this so i know what i am saying.
> 
> the little laws is what is killing us becuase it take small bits out of us. just like the lead ban for water foul. it started just in small area then it move to water shedes, then any duck and goose hunting, now it doves, it will soon be small games. they are already talking about making skeet clubs to strinp there shoot range from all the shots that shoot at the ranges. can you inmange having you hobby of sport skeet shooting went from $3 box - $10box skeet shoot will die over night. golf has realized that being a rich man sport is not a proffabl sport that why they are starting to get new people in. in some country it coast $1000 just to hunt that why only few people hunts and that why england has ban fox hunting there was not enough of people doing it to stop it. that could be us. our number are dropping and every one we lose is a less vote we have. people dont suport what they dont do.
> 
> you tell us how many animals die from lead poisen?


Entirely agreed, and further I'm convinced that such is understood by those proposing it and have the total intention of using it to get rid of hunting and firearms in general and no other real purpose. It's the perfect tool for using the gullibility of the non-hunting public to legislate away hunting and feel good about doing it.


----------



## sean

archerm3 said:


> Yes I suppose you should if you're too dense to see how this condor thing is affecting you in any way other than the magical domino theory of the antihunters. Yeah that domino theory held water during the cold war didnt it???? BTW, what are you hunting with solid wadcutter bullets?? These bans are in no way affecting your ability to target shoot. Only thing I can see from target shooting rights is that OSHA is requiring indoor ranges to provide better ventilation from lead dust that many ranges CHOOSE NOT TO PAY FOR.
> 
> What, do you want a medal for your superhuman lead bullet casting resources? Wish I could afford 3 furnaces and 2000 + pounds of ingots and all the money towards powder and surely hundreds of dollars in gas you spend going to the tournaments that cost you 10000s of shots per year.
> 
> If you choose to wear the hat of a victim, that is how you will be treated.
> 
> How many animals are you killing per year? And why cant you afford 4 dollars per animal shot? You are certainly spending more than that on arrows, and if you expect an arrow to survive more than one kill shot you are being unrealistic.
> 
> HUNTFISH I have no clue what youre trying to say in your last post. Your ANGLISH is unusually bad in that one.
> 
> Im sorry that some of you were expecting a uniform comiseration party on this topic.



I think the condor thing is BS its just a small piece in the greater scheme to outright ban all hunting firearm ownership and recreational fishing .... buy into it if you want romans drank from lead cups and ate from lead plates and plumbing has lots of lead in it if you believe condors die off in mass numbers from eating bullet fragments you are a fool


----------



## huntfish25

x-shocker said:


> If a tree falls, in a forest, and no one is around to see it, wouldn't the forest still be one less tree?
> 
> Do you need to see all the dead animals or will just some do? It will be hard to show you all the lead poisoned animals.
> 
> There was a case involving a kid from Minneapolis (within the last year) who swallowed a charm from a bracelet and died. The charm turned out to be pure lead and that killed the boy very quickly. I believe the charm bracelet was packaged with Nike shoes. Yes, I know, I know... lead only kills kids and not animals...



because a animals dies in the woods dont mean man did it. animals die in the woods and man is not always the cause. i sorry a child die. like i said befor if animals was die from lead shot bullet and shot animals will be dropping like flys.


----------



## x-shocker

huntfish25 said:


> because a animals dies in the woods dont mean man did it. animals die in the woods and man is not always the cause. i sorry a child die. like i said befor if animals was die from lead shot bullet and shot animals will be dropping like flys.


You missed the point.


----------



## P_R

x-shocker said:


> If a tree falls, in a forest, and no one is around to see it, wouldn't the forest still be one less tree?
> 
> Do you need to see all the dead animals or will just some do? It will be hard to show you all the lead poisoned animals.
> 
> There was a case involving a kid from Minneapolis (within the last year) who swallowed a charm from a bracelet and died. The charm turned out to be pure lead and that killed the boy very quickly. I believe the charm bracelet was packaged with Nike shoes. Yes, I know, I know... lead only kills kids and not animals...


Okay, so it seems that your premise is that if something is dangerous, causing harm and death to animals and people, then the government should ban it. How about we ban cars then? Think of all the lives we could save! How about we ban swimming pools and chainsaws while we're at it? Doctors wind up killing a bunch of people every year. Maybe we should ban then too, huh?

Or maybe you think that it's the purpose of government to save the planet from the evil humans. If so, should we ban oil? Think of all your little bridies that die in oil spills. Wouldn't it be worth it if we could save just one cute little seal? 

In regards to the little precious who swallowed the bracelet and died... My heart is bleeding. It really is. So how about this plan - let's ban lead, for the sake of the children, right after we ban this list of things that kids swallow and die from all the time:

alcohol - yeah, bring back prohibition, petaguy. That worked out well the last time!
diet pills
decongestants
blood pressure pills
household cleaners
bleach
gasoline
oil
pestisides
herbisides
holly 
or...
Carbon Monoxide or anything that might produce Carbon Monozide - like the internal combustion engine. Al Gore would be proud!


----------



## P_R

okay where's the edit button when I need it???

I am an unfeeling *******, but I don't wish to make light of the death of a kid. I should have left that out. That's not what I'm all about.

That said, we can't make good policies based on emotion. We must be masters of our emotion and trust logic over feelings. Yes, it's a tragedy when a kid dies from swalloing a bracelet, falling on his bike, or whatever. It's terrible. But to say that we should ban bicycles because a kid died on one is absolutely rediculous.


----------



## huntfish25

x-shocker said:


> You missed the point.


no i got it because something dies it from man. thta is how these wakos got everybody thinking. PR is right more cars has kill condos then the lead bullets. i dont see you or the antis groups want to stop cars. it us who is trying to save wildlife. let face it i sorry a kid die but why did the parts allow the kid to have it. i never allow my kids to have things that small and i watch them. i know kids get ahold of stuff in a split sec but it dont matter what it made of if the kid could not get it he will not swollow it


----------



## x-shocker

P_R said:


> Okay, so it seems that your premise is that if something is dangerous, causing harm and death to animals and people, then the government should ban it. How about we ban cars then? Think of all the lives we could save! How about we ban swimming pools and chainsaws while we're at it? Doctors wind up killing a bunch of people every year. Maybe we should ban then too, huh?
> 
> Or maybe you think that it's the purpose of government to save the planet from the evil humans. If so, should we ban oil? Think of all your little bridies that die in oil spills. Wouldn't it be worth it if we could save just one cute little seal?
> 
> In regards to the little precious who swallowed the bracelet and died... My heart is bleeding. It really is. So how about this plan - let's ban lead, for the sake of the children, right after we ban this list of things that kids swallow and die from all the time:
> 
> alcohol - yeah, bring back prohibition, petaguy. That worked out well the last time!
> diet pills
> decongestants
> blood pressure pills
> household cleaners
> bleach
> gasoline
> oil
> pestisides
> herbisides
> holly
> or...
> Carbon Monoxide or anything that might produce Carbon Monozide - like the internal combustion engine. Al Gore would be proud!


illogical thinking...


----------



## P_R

x-shocker said:


> illogical thinking...


Please explain the error in my logic. 

This is twice you've failed to address my points, prefering to make snippy little retorts. Last time you told me to grow up. This time you say I'm illogical. Show me the error of my thinking. Remember that I'm only an immature, illogical idiot so please explain it slowly and clearly so that even I can understand.

Again, I say that if your rational for this ban is to save lives, then you ought to be banning other things that kill. If your rational is to ban it in order to save the environment, then you should be banning other things that are harmful to the environment. I maintain that the reason you don't want to do these things is simply because you don't like people shooting lead bullets and therefore have concocted some reason for the government to ban it. And again, you should rethink this, because the day will come when someone doesn't like things that you do, and will then get the government to ban those things you enjoy.


----------



## Ed Bock

*Charm Bracelet ???*

Gee, I'd like to know more about that kid that swallowed a lead (whatever) from a charm bracelet and died "very quickly" - what exactly was listed as the cause of death - from an official source please!!!!!!!!! Sorry to say, but I have some doubts as to exactly what happened. So, X-Shocker, give us some details please. And was lead (the element) the main factor - or was this related to the ingestion of a foreign object - with lead being of no material importance?


----------



## huntfish25

x-shocker said:


> illogical thinking...



i think he has a point. more animals has die from drinking anti freeze the from lead. there has been alot reports of bird drinking anti freez from car leaking it but i dont see where they are make car ban anti freeze. that is one thing animals die from. what about getting kill from cars, i have hit about 10 bird a year with my car. it amaze me how i kill birds out of no where they fly right into my car.


----------



## archerm3

Im going to have a VICTIM party at my house next weekend. You are all invited. I will have 12 cases of KLEENEX and 24 cases of beer. Please bring your own therapist.


----------



## archerm3

So many ad hominem arguments I just dont have time to point them out anymore. I just hope no one hears your complaints.


----------



## archerm3

sean said:


> I think the condor thing is BS its just a small piece in the greater scheme to outright ban all hunting firearm ownership and recreational fishing .... buy into it if you want romans drank from lead cups and ate from lead plates and plumbing has lots of lead in it if you believe condors die off in mass numbers from eating bullet fragments you are a fool


I dare you to eat 3 lead .45 caliber bullets....and no internet BS either.


----------



## archerm3

P_R said:


> Please explain the error in my logic.
> 
> This is twice you've failed to address my points, prefering to make snippy little retorts. Last time you told me to grow up. This time you say I'm illogical. Show me the error of my thinking. Remember that I'm only an immature, illogical idiot so please explain it slowly and clearly so that even I can understand.
> 
> Again, *I say that if your rational for this ban is to save lives, then you ought to be banning other things that kill.* If your rational is to ban it in order to save the environment, then you should be banning other things that are harmful to the environment. I maintain that the reason you don't want to do these things is simply because you don't like people shooting lead bullets and therefore have concocted some reason for the government to ban it. And again, you should rethink this, because the day will come when someone doesn't like things that you do, and will then get the government to ban those things you enjoy.


Ok one more rebuttal...

This discussion is about saving Kalifornia CONDORS. NOT about children. Or about car accident victims, or emergency room patients that have injested bleach or jewelry or whatnot. Those are not endangered. CONDORS ARE. Your arguments about all the other dangerous things in the world, and how they should come first is not proper logic. It is ad hominem. It has no bearing on this case. 

The people who are in charge of preserving the CONDOR have come to a conclusion that banning lead bullets in one SMALL AREA of KALIFORNIA will contribute to the bird's comeback. Could it be a conspiracy theory of a handful of antihunters in california? Yes. IS IT AFFECTING ANYONE ON THIS FORUM OR ANYONE YOU KNOW THAT ACTUALLY HUNTS THERE? NO. You are just worried about the erosion of hunting rights, which is a valid concern. BUT YOU DO NOT WANT TO FIGHT THIS SPECIFIC ISSUE. If you want a military analogy, (which is ad hominem I know but its interesting), you do not always fight the enemy wherever you find them. You fight them on terrain that is beneficial to us. THIS BATTLE IS NOT BENEFICIAL TO US. IT MAKES US LOOK LIKE HEARTLESS *******S.

BUT IF YOU ARE GOING TO FIGHT THIS BY making a spectacle of yourselfs in the news, in magazines, in front of reporters, you are going to have to ADMIT THAT YOU DO NOT CARE IF THE CONDOR CONTINUES TO SURVIVE. 

AND YOU WILL DOOM THE PROHUNTING MOVEMENT.

YOU WILL SET US BACK TWENTY YEARS IN HUNTING RIGHTS ADVANCEMENT.

So yeah just keep popping off at the mouth about corrupt scientists, and circular logic about lead poisoning being a myth, and the truths about american economy getting tougher every day. Thank you for making those of us who actually stand face to face to antihunting groups and say things, thanks for making our jobs harder.

Is it probable that there is a national committee of antihunters that have every step from hunting regulations in the early 20th century clear to the passing of a law making it illegal to kill a mosquito in the year 2050 posted on a giant boardroom? Thats a little fantastic. That means far fetched to those of you who are vocabulary challenged. 

Do you really think that the Anti hunters are so deeply entrenched in politics, so well financed and organized, that they have complete control over national, state, county, and local politics, that far exceeds the planning and control exhibited by the Republican and Democratic parties put together?


----------



## huntfish25

archerm3 said:


> Ok one more rebuttal...
> 
> This discussion is about saving Kalifornia CONDORS. NOT about children. Or about car accident victims, or emergency room patients that have injested bleach or jewelry or whatnot. Those are not endangered. CONDORS ARE. Your arguments about all the other dangerous things in the world, and how they should come first is not proper logic. It is ad hominem. It has no bearing on this case.
> 
> The people who are in charge of preserving the CONDOR have come to a conclusion that banning lead bullets in one SMALL AREA of KALIFORNIA will contribute to the bird's comeback. Could it be a conspiracy theory of a handful of antihunters in california? Yes. IS IT AFFECTING ANYONE ON THIS FORUM OR ANYONE YOU KNOW THAT ACTUALLY HUNTS THERE? NO. You are just worried about the erosion of hunting rights, which is a valid concern. BUT YOU DO NOT WANT TO FIGHT THIS SPECIFIC ISSUE. If you want a military analogy, (which is ad hominem I know but its interesting), you do not always fight the enemy wherever you find them. You fight them on terrain that is beneficial to us. THIS BATTLE IS NOT BENEFICIAL TO US. IT MAKES US LOOK LIKE HEARTLESS *******S.
> 
> BUT IF YOU ARE GOING TO FIGHT THIS BY making a spectacle of yourselfs in the news, in magazines, in front of reporters, you are going to have to ADMIT THAT YOU DO NOT CARE IF THE CONDOR CONTINUES TO SURVIVE.
> 
> AND YOU WILL DOOM THE PROHUNTING MOVEMENT.
> 
> YOU WILL SET US BACK TWENTY YEARS IN HUNTING RIGHTS ADVANCEMENT.
> 
> So yeah just keep popping off at the mouth about corrupt scientists, and circular logic about lead poisoning being a myth, and the truths about american economy getting tougher every day. Thank you for making those of us who actually stand face to face to antihunting groups and say things, thanks for making our jobs harder.
> 
> Is it probable that there is a national committee of antihunters that have every step from hunting regulations in the early 20th century clear to the passing of a law making it illegal to kill a mosquito in the year 2050 posted on a giant boardroom? Thats a little fantastic. That means far fetched to those of you who are vocabulary challenged.
> 
> Do you really think that the Anti hunters are so deeply entrenched in politics, so well financed and organized, that they have complete control over national, state, county, and local politics, that far exceeds the planning and control exhibited by the Republican and Democratic parties put together?



in 10 years your bullets went up %50 because of this and you be complaning how much it coast to hunt every year. i am for saving wildlife but banning lead bullets will not help. if you feeel it will stop using them.


----------



## archerm3

huntfish25 said:


> in 10 years your bullets went up %50 because of this and you be complaning how much it coast to hunt every year. i am for saving wildlife but banning lead bullets will not help. if you feeel it will stop using them.


Um no my bullets have not raised in price in ten years. Some are even cheaper. Dont know where you are shopping. Remington .243 corelokt on sale at 8.47 at cabelas. Paid over 10 for a box 15 years ago. Sticker is still on the box.


----------



## archerm3

huntfish25 said:


> in 10 years your bullets went up %50 because of this and you be complaning how much it coast to hunt every year. i am for saving wildlife but banning lead bullets will not help. if you feeel it will stop using them.


If your going to quote my post then at least show me where a statement I have made is false. 

OR ACKNOWLEDGE THAT YOU HAVE READ AND UNDERSTAND IT. DONT JUST CHANGE THE SUBJECT.


----------



## archerm3

huntfish25 said:


> in 10 years your bullets went up %50 because of this and you be complaning how much it coast to hunt every year. i am for saving wildlife but banning lead bullets will not help. if you feeel it will stop using them.


Where are you at on your resume to be the next EPA DIRECTOR? Or US. Fish and Wildlife service?

http://www.fws.gov/offices/Directorscorner.htm


----------



## archerm3

California condor 

Gymnogyps californianus


SPECIES CODE: B002 V01


STATUS:

Listed Endangered (32 FR 4001, 1967 March 11) with Critical Habitat (41 FR 41914, 1976 September 24), except where Nonessential Experimental (Northern Arizona) (61 FR 54043 54060, 1996 October 16). Recovery Plan completed April 25, 1996.


Note: All descriptions are abstracted and cited from the Recovery Plan (1996) and the Biology of the California Condor, prepared by Lead Region 1, USFWS.


SPECIES DESCRIPTION:

The California condor is a member of the family Cathartidae or New World vultures. California condors are among the largest flying birds in the world. Adults weigh approximately 10 kilograms (22 lbs.) and have a wingspan up to 2.9 meters (9 ½ ft). Adults are black except for prominent white underwing linings and edges of the upper secondary coverts. The head and neck are mostly naked, and the bare skin is gray, grading into various shades of yellow, red, and orange. Males and females cannot be distinguished by size or plumage characteristics. The heads of juveniles up to 3 years old are grayish-black, and their wing linings are variously mottled or completely dark. During the third year the head develops yellow coloration, and the wing linings become gradually whiter (N.J. Schmitt in prep.). By the time individuals are 5 or 6 years of age, they are essentially indistinguishable from adults (Koford 1953, Wilbur 1975, Snyder et al. 1987), but full development of the adult wing patterns may not be completed until 7 or 8 years of age (N.J. Schmitt in prep.).


California condors are opportunistic scavengers, feeding only on the carcasses of dead animals, including deer, cattle, and marine mammals such as whales and seals. A condor may eat up to 3 to 4 pounds at a time and may not need to feed again for several days. After eating, condors bathe in rock pools and will spend many hours preening and drying their feathers.


REPRODUCTION AND DEVELOPMENT:

Courtship and nest site selection by breeding California condors occur from December through the spring months. Reproductively mature, paired California condors normally lay a single egg between late January and early April. The egg is incubated by both parents and after approximately 56 days. Both parents share responsibilities for feeding the nestling. Fee usually occurs daily for the first two months, then gradually diminishes in frequency. At two to three months of age condor chicks leave the actual nest cavity, but remain in the vicinity of the nest where they are fed by their parents. The chick takes its first flight at about six to seven months of age, but may not become fully independent of its parents until the following year. Parent birds occasionally continue to feed a fledgling even after it has begun to make longer flights to foraging grounds. California condors may lay a replacement clutch if their first (Harrison and Kiff 1980) or even second egg is lost (Snyder and Hamber 1985). Because subadult birds had never been observed in the wild as members of breeding pairs, Koford (1953) concluded that California condors did not breed before six years of age, the time at which the adult plumage is acquired


California condors nest in various types of rock formations including crevices, overhung ledges, and potholes, and, more rarely, in cavities in giant sequoia trees (Sequoia giganteus) (Snyder et al. 1986). Although potential condor nesting habitat still exists over a relatively large portion of the coastal and interior mountains in central and southern California, the recently occupied nesting range was quite limited.


RANGE AND POPULATION LEVEL:

During the Pleistocene Era, ending 10,000 years ago, the condor's range extended across much of North America. At the time of the arrival of pioneers, the condor's range extended along the Pacific Coast from British Columbia south through Baja California, Mexico. By 1940 the range had been reduced to the coastal mountains of southern California with nesting occurring primarily in the rugged, chaparral-covered mountains, and foraging in the foothills and grasslands of the San Joaquin Valley. Today condors are being reintroduced into the mountains of southern California north of the Los Angeles basin, in the Big Sur vicinity of the central California coast, and near the Grand Canyon in Arizona.


The current population is 103, including 86 individuals in captivity at the Los Angeles Zoo, San Diego Wild Animal Park, and the World Center for Birds of Prey, and 17 captive-hatched condors released into Santa Barbara and San Luis Obispo Counties in southern California (USFWS 1996).


HABITAT:

California condors require suitable habitat for nesting, roosting, and foraging. The recent range was restricted to chaparral, coniferous forests, and oak savannah habitats in southern and central California. The species formerly occurred more widely throughout the Southwest and also fed on beaches and large rivers along the Pacific coast. Nest sites are located in cavities in cliffs, in large rock outcrops, or in large trees. Traditional roosting sites are maintained on cliffs or large trees, often near feeding sites. Foraging occurs mostly in grasslands, including potreros within chaparral areas, or in oak savannahs. At present, sufficient remaining habitat exists in California and in southwestern states to support a large number of condors, if density independent mortality factors, including shooting, lead poisoning, and collisions with man-made objects, can be controlled. The possibility of eventual genetic problems, resulting from the species' recent perilously low population size, cannot be discounted.


PAST THREATS:

Causes of the California condor population decline have probably been numerous and variable through time. However, despite decades of research, it is not known with certainty which mortality factors have been dominant in the overall decline of the species. Relatively few dead California condors have been found, and definitive conclusions on the causes of death were made in only a small portion of these cases (Miller et al. 1965, Wilbur 1978, Snyder and Snyder 1989). Although the information regarding California condor mortality is inconclusive, these is evidence to suggest that two anthropogenic factors, lead poisoning and shooting, have contributed disproportionately to the decline of the species in recent years. In addition, four of the 19 California condors released since 1992 died from collisions with power lines. 


Kiff et al. (1979) reported severe thinning and ultrastructural abnormalities in California condor eggshells collected in the late I960s by F. Sibley. They attributed the abnormalities to the probable effects of 1,1-dichloro,-2,2-bis(p-chlorophenyl)etylene (DDE), a breakdown metabolite of the pesticide 1,1,1-trichloro-2,2-bis(p-chloro-phenyl)ethane (DDT). DDT was banned for domestic use in the United States in 1972, and virtually all condor eggshell samples collected after 1975 have exhibited normal thickness (Snyder et al. ms). However, two eggs laid in 1986 by the last female California condor (Stud Book 12) to breed in the wild were very thin (44% thinner than the historical mean thickness) and contained inexplicably high levels of DDE and the parent compound, DDT (Kiff 1989). Indeed, the first-laid of these eggs was crushed, probably by the weight of the incubating bird, before it could be removed for captive incubation. The effect of eggshell thinning on the condor population cannot be accurately assessed now, but it could have been a serious factor during the 1950s-1960s. Significant eggshell thinning has also been reported for the turkey vulture within the region of sympatry with the California condor (Wilbur 1978b, Kiff et al. 1979, Wiemeyer et al. 1986). Organochlorine concentrations were low in four condors analyzed for these contaminants between 1980-86 (Wiemeyer et al. 1988), but the highly contaminated eggs from 1986 indicate that continued monitoring of such compounds in condors and surrogate species is warranted.


Other serious factors formerly contributing to the decline of the species were egg and specimen collecting, capture of live birds for sport or display, Indian ceremonial use, and drowning in uncovered oil sumps. These activities are no longer believed to represent threats to California condors.


CURRENT THREATS:

At present, sufficient remaining habitat exists in California and in southwestern states to support a large number of condors, if density independent mortality factors, including shooting, lead poisoning, and collisions with man-made objects, can be controlled. The possibility of eventual genetic problems, resulting from the species' recent perilously low population size, cannot be discounted.


CONSERVATION MEASURES: 



LITERATURE CITED:

Harrison, E.N., and L.F. Kiff. 1980. Apparent replacement clutch laid by wild California 

condor. Condor 82:35 1-352.

Kiff, L.F. 1989. DDE and the California condor Gymnogyps californianus: the end of the 

story? In B.U. Meyburg and R.D. Chancellor (eds.). Raptors in the Modern World. pp. 477-480. World Working Group on Birds of Prey, Berlin.

Kiff, L.F., D.B. Peakall, and SR. Wilbur. 1979. Recent changes in California condor 

eggshells. Condor 8 1:166-172.

Koford, C.B. 1953. The California condor. National Audubon Society Research Report 

4:1-154.

Miller, A.H., I. McMillan, and E. McMilIan. 1965. The current status and welfare of the

California condor. National Audubon Society Research Report 6:1-61.

Schmitt, N.J. In Prep. A study of the California condor molt.

Snyder, N.F.R., E.V. Johnson, and D.A. Clendenen. 1987. Primary molt of California 

condors. Condor 89:468-485.

Snyder, N.F.R., R.R. Ramey, and F.C. Sibley. 1986. Nest-site biology of the California 

condor. Condor 88:228-241

Snyder, N.F.R., and H. Snyder. 1989. Biology and conservation of the California condor. 

In D.M. Powers (ed.). Current ornithology, Vol. 6. Pp. 175-267. Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History, Santa Barbara, California.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1996. California Condor Recovery Plan, Third Revision.

Portland, Oregon. 62 pp.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). XXXX. Biology of the California Condor, 

Facts About Condors. Lead Region 1. http://pacific.fws.gov/condor/facts.htm.

Wiemeyer, S.N., RM. Jurek, and JR. Moore. 1986. Environmental contaminants in 

surrogates, foods and feathers of California condors (Gymnogyps californianus). Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 6:91-111.

Wiemeyer, S.N. J.M. Scott, M.P. Anderson, P.H. Bloom, and C.J. Stafford. 1988. 

Environmental Contaminants in California condors. Journal of Wildlife Management 52:238-247.

Wilbur, S.R. 1975. California condor plumage and molt as field study aids. California 

Fish and Game 61:144-148.

Wilbur, SR. 1978a. The California condor, 1966-76: a look at its past and future. U.S. 

Fish and Wildlife Service, North America Fauna 72:1-136.

Wilbur, S.R. 1978b. Turkey vulture eggshell thinning in California, Florida, and Texas. 

Wilson Bulletin 90:642-643.


----------



## huntfish25

the condor may be a animals that is past his time. there may not every come back and that is sad but it happens. i will never want to see a great animal go and i for one will want to save them but some animals you can not. there are some animals that will not come back. if there was not there will be mamyths running around in AK today. we are trying but they take a long time to grow up and there eggs take a long time to hatch. what you want us to do stop liven to save a bird? hay if people has that much affect on these bird why dont you stop hunting there. because if some body may shoot one. all for saving wildlife and save land, i give alot of money to save wildlife but in the same breath i want to save hunting. just like teddy rosevelt not only want to save wildlife he also want there be hunting, trapping , and fishing for the rest of the people and there kids. i will love to see a sabertooth tiger one day but they did not survive and it nothing we can do about it. we may save the condor but if we dont it dont mean it our falt we must move on


----------



## P_R

archerm3 said:


> Ok one more rebuttal...
> 
> This discussion is about saving Kalifornia CONDORS. NOT about children. Or about car accident victims, or emergency room patients that have injested bleach or jewelry or whatnot. Those are not endangered. CONDORS ARE. Your arguments about all the other dangerous things in the world, and how they should come first is not proper logic. It is ad hominem. It has no bearing on this case.


A kid in the ER who just injested bleach is certainly endangered IMO. But apparently according to you and the cali liberals, a stupid bird is more important. In fact according to you guys, humans ought to give up their freedom to save a damn bird. If it wasn't the condor, it would be hopping mouse, or a little fish, or some weed. I don't think you love nature so much as you love controling others, limiting their freedom.

And here's a suggestion...if you're going to try to make yourself look smart by throwing around latin like "ad hominem", then first learn what it means. Just for your edification, an ad hominem is a type of logical fallacy in which a person attacks their opponent rather than what their opponent is saying. The implication of ad hominem attacks is that since the person is "bad", then their argument must be bad. This doesn't necessarily follow, which, of course, is why it's a fallacy. The only ad hominem's I've seen in this thread was an insult to huntfish25 regarding his lack of spell checking. The person insulting huntfish was saying that since huntfish's typing isn't so polished, that what huntfish was saying had no merit. Not true. Huntfish's points were good, but they weren't addressed. The only response was to attack him.



archerm3 said:


> The people who are in charge of preserving the CONDOR have come to a conclusion that banning lead bullets in one SMALL AREA of KALIFORNIA will contribute to the bird's comeback. Could it be a conspiracy theory of a handful of antihunters in california? Yes. IS IT AFFECTING ANYONE ON THIS FORUM OR ANYONE YOU KNOW THAT ACTUALLY HUNTS THERE? NO. You are just worried about the erosion of hunting rights, which is a valid concern. BUT YOU DO NOT WANT TO FIGHT THIS SPECIFIC ISSUE. If you want a military analogy, (which is ad hominem I know but its interesting), you do not always fight the enemy wherever you find them. You fight them on terrain that is beneficial to us. THIS BATTLE IS NOT BENEFICIAL TO US. IT MAKES US LOOK LIKE HEARTLESS *******S.


1. Hmmmm, it wasn't my impression that this ban applied to only a small area of California. 
2. I don't really care about "hunting" rights. I do care about the constant erosion of all Constitutionally enumerated rights including the second amendment. I really hate the notion that God given freedoms should be abandoned due to excuses about wanting to save a doomed species.
3. There's that "ad hominem" referrence again...
4. If this battle isn't beneficial to us, then what battle is? How do we "win" by constantly giving up freedom? If you're happy and you know it, rattle your chains!
5. I am a heartless *******. However, I'd bet that I've got a better handle on right v wrong than you do. At least I can see the difference in value between a person and an animal. At least I value the essential element of freedom to the human condition.



archerm3 said:


> BUT IF YOU ARE GOING TO FIGHT THIS BY making a spectacle of yourselfs in the news, in magazines, in front of reporters, you are going to have to ADMIT THAT YOU DO NOT CARE IF THE CONDOR CONTINUES TO SURVIVE.


Okay, I don't care if the condor continues to survive. Freedom trumps birds.


----------



## sean

P_R said:


> A kid in the ER who just injested bleach is certainly endangered IMO. But apparently according to you and the cali liberals, a stupid bird is more important. In fact according to you guys, humans ought to give up their freedom to save a damn bird. If it wasn't the condor, it would be hopping mouse, or a little fish, or some weed. I don't think you love nature so much as you love controling others, limiting their freedom.
> 
> And here's a suggestion...if you're going to try to make yourself look smart by throwing around latin like "ad hominem", then first learn what it means. Just for your edification, an ad hominem is a type of logical fallacy in which a person attacks their opponent rather than what their opponent is saying. The implication of ad hominem attacks is that since the person is "bad", then their argument must be bad. This doesn't necessarily follow, which, of course, is why it's a fallacy. The only ad hominem's I've seen in this thread was an insult to huntfish25 regarding his lack of spell checking. The person insulting huntfish was saying that since huntfish's typing isn't so polished, that what huntfish was saying had no merit. Not true. Huntfish's points were good, but they weren't addressed. The only response was to attack him.
> 
> 
> 1. Hmmmm, it wasn't my impression that this ban applied to only a small area of California.
> 2. I don't really care about "hunting" rights. I do care about the constant erosion of all Constitutionally enumerated rights including the second amendment. I really hate the notion that God given freedoms should be abandoned due to excuses about wanting to save a doomed species.
> 3. There's that "ad hominem" referrence again...
> 4. If this battle isn't beneficial to us, then what battle is? How do we "win" by constantly giving up freedom? If you're happy and you know it, rattle your chains!
> 5. I am a heartless *******. However, I'd bet that I've got a better handle on right v wrong than you do. At least I can see the difference in value between a person and an animal. At least I value the essential element of freedom to the human condition.
> 
> 
> Okay, I don't care if the condor continues to survive. Freedom trumps birds.





YUP what he said


----------



## affe22

P_R said:


> In fact according to you guys, humans ought to give up their freedom to save a damn bird. If it wasn't the condor, it would be hopping mouse, or a little fish, or some weed. I don't think you love nature so much as you love controling others, limiting their freedom.


Sorry, human freedom should not come at the cost of being bad stewards of the environment. We have a responsibility to do the best we can to keep the species that are on the earth here until they meet their natural end and recover the ones that we drove to the point of extinction. As the environment goes, so does human kind.

For all the people saying that this ban would cause prices to be so high no one could shoot, that is just bad economics. If lead is banned, all bullet manufacturers will have to produce all non-tox, which would mean the market would be flooded with the stuff. As it is right now, steel is in semi-high supply and you can get it for like $10 a box. The stuff that is ridculously high priced is the high density non-tox that only a few produce. As more and more becomes available, the prices will drop because they'll have to compete for business.


----------



## huntfish25

affe22 said:


> Sorry, human freedom should not come at the cost of being bad stewards of the environment. We have a responsibility to do the best we can to keep the species that are on the earth here until they meet their natural end and recover the ones that we drove to the point of extinction. As the environment goes, so does human kind.
> 
> For all the people saying that this ban would cause prices to be so high no one could shoot, that is just bad economics. If lead is banned, all bullet manufacturers will have to produce all non-tox, which would mean the market would be flooded with the stuff. As it is right now, steel is in semi-high supply and you can get it for like $10 a box. The stuff that is ridculously high priced is the high density non-tox that only a few produce. As more and more becomes available, the prices will drop because they'll have to compete for business.


THE STEEL SHOT THEY USED FOR DUCK DID MORE HARM THEN GOOD. if you asked duck huters they will tell you steel shot did not kill ducks like lead did matter fact it crippile more birds. so for being good stewerds of wildlife this ban could harming wildlife. you know when the duck hunter brought this up at meeting with the anti's they said stop hunting. like i said befor it could be the end of the condor so it sad it happen. do you think humans kill off the amercan sloth, sabor tooth tiger, mamyth, or thousand other animals? it call nature and it will take it own. some animals just dont make it. i dont herd you given up you car to save wildlife and that kills just as many condor, what about electric the wires has kill them. live in the dark so the condor wont get harm.


----------



## affe22

huntfish25 said:


> if you asked duck huters they will tell you steel shot did not kill ducks like lead did matter fact it crippile more birds. so for being good stewerds of wildlife this ban could harming wildlife.


I am a duck hunter and I have no problems with steel shot. The key is shooting up 2 sizes and waiting until the birds are in close and not skybusting. Steel shot works just fine then. If you want to shoot long ranges, you buy hevi-steel or hevi-shot. I guess you don't duck hunt and wouldn't really know?



huntfish25 said:


> do you think humans kill off the amercan sloth, sabor tooth tiger, mamyth, or thousand other animals? it call nature and it will take it own. some animals just dont make it.


You're right, the american sloth, saber-toothed tiger, and wooly mammoth were not driven to extinction by people. The California Condor has been due to certain factors that we can help. It's called DDT, unregulated harvest, habitat destruction, etc. That, to me, doesn't point to it being a species' time as much as it is people needing to change something that is causing huge problems with the environment, aka being better stewards of what we have.


----------



## pwahuntn

Are they gonna ban the lead they use for the Military because they practice with lead bullets. And its still going into our system.


----------



## huntfish25

pwahuntn said:


> Are they gonna ban the lead they use for the Military because they practice with lead bullets. And its still going into our system.


they are already. somepeople tell me i am wrong but the fort mead base here in maryland there is no lead allow there for hunting and that is shot and bullets. the closes condor is 2000 miles away


----------



## NRen2k5

OT, but I've got a funny one for you.

In the last couple of years, have you seen any electronics that say on the package that they use lead-free solder?

Ordinarily electronics are soldered with an alloy of tin and lead, because this makes a good joint between component and circuitboard which can withstand heat and vibration.

In the interest of being more "green"  the industry is switching to lead-free solder now.

The problem? The lead-free solder has a higher melting point and takes longer to wet, meaning that manufacturers are wasting more energy in using it. And then there's the fact that it doesn't form as good a joint as the traditional stuff, meaning electronics made with it don't last nearly as long as they should... so you have people throwing away more electronics more often, greating a bigger garbage problem.

Back on the topic of lead _bullets_... have a lab team go to your local outdoor shooting range and take samples from the soil only yards away from the range. They will of course find NOTHING. The whole idea of lead leeching out in to the environment is a load of bull.


----------



## sean

huntfish25 said:


> they are already. somepeople tell me i am wrong but the fort mead base here in maryland there is no lead allow there for hunting and that is shot and bullets. the closes condor is 2000 miles away





current ss109 5.56 ammo uses a steel rod core and contains no lead and its not because of condors its for a -holes wearing body armor :wink:


----------



## huntfish25

sean said:


> current ss109 5.56 ammo uses a steel rod core and contains no lead and its not because of condors its for a -holes wearing body armor :wink:


i hunt there and it clear no lead bullets allow on the base. why? it a toxis


----------



## gilliland87

*ok everyone is so worried about banned lead shot*

:wink: I'll hapilly sell you the lead, i have about a ton and a half of it under the deck in the back yard, but shipping might hurt ya, or you can check the local srap yard and buy it a 7 cents a pound. and pour your own shot. the turkey frying jet burners and a cast iron dutch oven smelt it up nicely.


----------



## x-shocker

huntfish25 said:


> i hunt there and it clear no lead bullets allow on the base. why? it a toxis


Give Barnes X-Bullets a try. They kill better than lead bullets.

Give Tungston (sp.) a try. They kill better than lead shots.

If you are concerned about ammo cost, drive a 4 banger sedan instead of the good old 8 banger pickup to your hunting spots. Most hunting spots have nice paved or graveled roads leading to them, now-a-days. The low fuel cost will allow you to purchase more Tungston or X-Bullets for your hunts. By the way, one shot one kill will save your bullets or shots which translate to money saved.


----------



## DwayneR

*I can't believe you guys believe this stuff...*

Folks WAKE UP!!

The REASON (and the ONLY reason) why they banned lead shot, is because sometimes the birds would be *shot* with it, and NOT be injured. The end result was that the shot stayed INSIDE the bird and supposingly poisened it. This (in turn) allowed a injured bird to fly away and slowly die of lead poisoning without being harvested.

NOW! listen closely folks... the ODDS of a condor SWALLOWING the bullet are minute... And *IF* they did, it would exit their body within 24 hours anyhow through their dung. Would they get lead poisoning? Naw...maybe a little increase in lead, but that will go away when they excrete their feces.

Sorry folks, I believe this is another way to discourage hunting by the Anti's.

Dwayne


----------



## thh058

x-shocker said:


> If you are concerned about ammo cost, drive a 4 banger sedan instead of the good old 8 banger pickup to your hunting spots. Most hunting spots have nice paved or graveled roads leading to them, now-a-days. The low fuel cost will allow you to purchase more Tungston or X-Bullets for your hunts. By the way, one shot one kill will save your bullets or shots which translate to money saved.


if you drive a "4 banger sedan," then how are you supposed to get your deer home?

one shot, one kill will certainly save money on shells. but what about all of that practice time to make that one shot, one kill possible?


----------



## huntfish25

x-shocker said:


> Give Barnes X-Bullets a try. They kill better than lead bullets.
> 
> Give Tungston (sp.) a try. They kill better than lead shots.
> 
> If you are concerned about ammo cost, drive a 4 banger sedan instead of the good old 8 banger pickup to your hunting spots. Most hunting spots have nice paved or graveled roads leading to them, now-a-days. The low fuel cost will allow you to purchase more Tungston or X-Bullets for your hunts. By the way, one shot one kill will save your bullets or shots which translate to money saved.


it control. why cant we have a choice to used lead or copper. if copper is good we will change and in reture the lead will stop. look at arrows first was wood then allum and now carbon


----------



## sean

DwayneR said:


> Folks WAKE UP!!
> 
> The REASON (and the ONLY reason) why they banned lead shot, is because sometimes the birds would be *shot* with it, and NOT be injured. The end result was that the shot stayed INSIDE the bird and supposingly poisened it. This (in turn) allowed a injured bird to fly away and slowly die of lead poisoning without being harvested.
> 
> NOW! listen closely folks... the ODDS of a condor SWALLOWING the bullet are minute... And *IF* they did, it would exit their body within 24 hours anyhow through their dung. Would they get lead poisoning? Naw...maybe a little increase in lead, but that will go away when they excrete their feces.
> 
> Sorry folks, I believe this is another way to discourage hunting by the Anti's.
> 
> Dwayne




I have friends and dogs with lead pellets in their boddies and the doctors and vets wouldnt remove them and said it was no big deal .... I believe it has to be breathed or injested to be fatal


----------



## Dchiefransom

archerm3 said:


> Um no my bullets have not raised in price in ten years. Some are even cheaper. Dont know where you are shopping. Remington .243 corelokt on sale at 8.47 at cabelas. Paid over 10 for a box 15 years ago. Sticker is still on the box.


That same box is $27.99 today. You need to burn up 3 or more boxes per about every 2 months to stay proficient enough to be an ethical hunter. 

The area of California proposed is not a small area, it's quite a large area. Zone A is the largest zone in the state. There are no condors in many parts of zone A. 
On a side note, I wonder what has endangered wildlife out here more, possible lead ingestion, or the poisoning of the state's groundwater by MTBE that the Federal Government forced us to use?


----------



## huntfish25

Dchiefransom said:


> That same box is $27.99 today. You need to burn up 3 or more boxes per about every 2 months to stay proficient enough to be an ethical hunter.
> 
> The area of California proposed is not a small area, it's quite a large area. Zone A is the largest zone in the state. There are no condors in many parts of zone A.
> On a side note, I wonder what has endangered wildlife out here more, possible lead ingestion, or the poisoning of the state's groundwater by MTBE that the Federal Government forced us to use?


good point i also think most are posin buy other means then from bullets or shots


----------



## x-shocker

Dchiefransom said:


> That same box is $27.99 today. You need to burn up 3 or more boxes per about every 2 months to stay proficient enough to be an ethical hunter.


Hog-wash!!! If you need to burn up 3 boxes every 2 months to stay proficient, something is wrong with you and it has nothing to do with hunting ethics. All you need is to get to know your gun and zero the scope before every hunt. The extra time, bullet, and money spent on the range does not make you any more ethical than the guy who zero-ed in his scope and leaves for the hunt.

Here are the three main points of hunting ethics:
1) Obey the laws of the land;
2) Get use to your weapon(s);
3) Zero in your weapon(s) before every hunt.


----------



## thejohnchapman

Ok, guys, I know some of these "anti-lead" folks are new and anonymous. I am neither. 

They have a point. When I attended the NRA range design course back in '99, a MAJOR component of what we discussed was the toxic hazard of lead. It is really something to be careful about. 

With that said, there ARE ways lead can be shot so that almost all of it can be recovered and recycled. Moreover, a lot of people are NOW doing it. 

It adds an extra cost increment to hunting, though not by much. How many highpower rifle bullets do you shoot in a year (though varminters may have a beef).

This is one of those cases where the countervailing considerations are NOT all esthetics. Also, a lot of the problem might be solved by limiting shooting lead to places where it is likely to be recovered, rather than oxidizing and becoming bioavailable in the groundwater.

Also, where the intended use is KILLING PEOPLE, I expect that the toxic qualities are not such a big deal -- law enforcement and personal defense ammo.

Lots of agencies, AND the feds, now use non lead rounds for practice indoors, for the reasons stated here.

So, If any of you are hanging out on the hunting forum, you know I am not shy about criticizing any antihunting agenda disguised as something else. While a BAN on lead ammo goes a bit far, IMHO, a LIMIT on certain uses might be workable, make sense, and not cost a heck of a lot more.

Again, IMHO, not insane. Worthy of discussion.

PS: AK ammo is almost ALL copper jacket steel core. It is dirt cheap.


----------



## huntfish25

thejohnchapman said:


> Ok, guys, I know some of these "anti-lead" folks are new and anonymous. I am neither.
> 
> They have a point. When I attended the NRA range design course back in '99, a MAJOR component of what we discussed was the toxic hazard of lead. It is really something to be careful about.
> 
> With that said, there ARE ways lead can be shot so that almost all of it can be recovered and recycled. Moreover, a lot of people are NOW doing it.
> 
> It adds an extra cost increment to hunting, though not by much. How many highpower rifle bullets do you shoot in a year (though varminters may have a beef).
> 
> This is one of those cases where the countervailing considerations are NOT all esthetics. Also, a lot of the problem might be solved by limiting shooting lead to places where it is likely to be recovered, rather than oxidizing and becoming bioavailable in the groundwater.
> 
> Also, where the intended use is KILLING PEOPLE, I expect that the toxic qualities are not such a big deal -- law enforcement and personal defense ammo.
> 
> Lots of agencies, AND the feds, now use non lead rounds for practice indoors, for the reasons stated here.
> 
> So, If any of you are hanging out on the hunting forum, you know I am not shy about criticizing any antihunting agenda disguised as something else. While a BAN on lead ammo goes a bit far, IMHO, a LIMIT on certain uses might be workable, make sense, and not cost a heck of a lot more.
> 
> Again, IMHO, not insane. Worthy of discussion.
> 
> PS: AK ammo is almost ALL copper jacket steel core. It is dirt cheap.



like i said befor if you choice not to used lead then dont but i dont want a out right band of lead. there is no proff that lead is harming humans or wildlife. there are more harm of polution of plants that dumps in the ground and in the water then a few lead bullets in the ground. for the coast you are wrong. like i said befor befor the lead shot was ban for duck a box of shot gun shells was a close to $3 a box now it will coast you $15 a box that is 5x as much. this is why i think alot of people has stop duck hunting. it bad enough that lic has been on the rised for years now we have ammo doing the same. i dont care if you shot one bullet a year to thousand. if somebody show me one proff the lead bullet is harm wildlife or people i will change my tune. so far its just a bunch of goverment tell me it is. i dont trust the goverment or the companies that what me pay 5x more for bullets. the NRA only doing what the companies or the goverment doing. the reson why the goverment is not using lead because they band it and it our taxes is buy the bullets so who cares


----------



## grenadier

I love those scavengers as much as the next guy, but this reeks of politics.
Lead is poisonous, I learned that in grade school. However, any study coming
from this particular University needs much more scrutiny. 
Just in case you aren't familiar with Santa Cruz, it makes Peta, Berkeley, ELF,
Fidel Castro and Hugo Chavez look like poster boys for the GOP. Check this out:

http://michellemalkin.com/archives/004974.htm 

The kind of folks who'd stand on a homeless person to spit on a US soldier
seem to be running things there.


----------



## ban_t

Well if you are worried about the cost. Just track the cost of scrape meatals.
The overall cost of metal's have doubled almost tripple in some case's. That in turn has already come too the comsumer. I am a electrician who has seen first hand what copper price's have gone too in the last 5 years. That is just scrape. 

What we really need too do is band together againist the Anti's propaganda. if we look at the information posted here I have not seen anything in the studies that state, Any New Information. All Information is dated back too the 80's and the 60's. With the first Cause of death with DDT, cars, powerlines and lead. I also noted that Lead was a small cause very unlikely. Let's not forget the slow reproduction rate of the birds. 

I think it is great that we tried too save them but nature has it's way of letting the strong surrive too.


----------



## [email protected]

x-shocker said:


> Hog-wash!!! If you need to burn up 3 boxes every 2 months to stay proficient, something is wrong with you and it has nothing to do with hunting ethics. All you need is to get to know your gun and zero the scope before every hunt. The extra time, bullet, and money spent on the range does not make you any more ethical than the guy who zero-ed in his scope and leaves for the hunt.
> 
> Here are the three main points of hunting ethics:
> 1) Obey the laws of the land;
> 2) Get use to your weapon(s);
> 3) Zero in your weapon(s) before every hunt.


so for sharts and giggles lets say you sight in with 5 rounds...you're telling me you shooting those five rounds at your zero(100yards for this hypo) you know just from zeroing your rifle where that bullet is going to hit at say 225yards?? and that you've shot so much throughout your hunting career that you know where your particular load is going to hit in any given wind condition, humidity level, and altitude??? maybe you are as smart as you THINK you are.


----------



## Punch_Free4L

Maybe this has already been mentioned,but New York banned the sale of lead fishing sinkers a few years back so it's not just a hunting thing:sad:


----------



## x-shocker

b0wtech4me said:


> so for sharts and giggles lets say you sight in with 5 rounds...you're telling me you shooting those five rounds at your zero(100yards for this hypo) you know just from zeroing your rifle where that bullet is going to hit at say 225yards?? and that you've shot so much throughout your hunting career that you know where your particular load is going to hit in any given wind condition, humidity level, and altitude??? maybe you are as smart as you THINK you are.


To go from 100 to 225 yards, you just have to zero your rifle and do some math based on the charts given by your cartridge manufacturers. If you would just check your "zero" when you get to your hunting destination, you would have the altitude and humidity factors taken cared of. As far as wind is concerned, you can master that factor if you join the US Marine Sniper Brigade.:wink:

Wind changes and unless you have wind flags set up every 50 yards between you and the game animal, you are just as much guessing as the next Joe.

How about that come-back, buddy?


----------



## sean

eeekster said:


> Maybe this has already been mentioned,but New York banned the sale of lead fishing sinkers a few years back so it's not just a hunting thing:sad:




thats why I am proud to be from oregon :wink:


----------



## huntfish25

x-shocker said:


> To go from 100 to 225 yards, you just have to zero your rifle and do some math based on the charts given by your cartridge manufacturers. If you would just check your "zero" when you get to your hunting destination, you would have the altitude and humidity factors taken cared of. As far as wind is concerned, you can master that factor if you join the US Marine Sniper Brigade.:wink:
> 
> Wind changes and unless you have wind flags set up every 50 yards between you and the game animal, you are just as much guessing as the next Joe.
> 
> How about that come-back, buddy?


tell snipers that they do not need to shoot there guns to shoot good.

you need to know your gun with out shooting them you will never know. i was looking the other day at bullets they are $30 now with lead can you inmage how much when lead is ban. will somebody show one animals die from lead posin that was a bullet


----------



## JDES900X

Talk about "Flowers for Agernon".... Glad I had a few :beer::beer::beer: before I read it. 

Can anyone say Charlie Gordon?


----------

