More anti-lead propaganda

Gun, shooting and equipment discussions unrelated to CHL issues

Moderator: carlson1

Post Reply
User avatar
fickman
Senior Member
Posts: 1711
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2008 2:52 pm
Location: Fort Worth, Texas

More anti-lead propaganda

Post by fickman »

Source: http://www.cnn.com/2009/TECH/science/03 ... index.html
Should hunters switch to 'green' bullets?
By John D. Sutter
CNN


(CNN) -- Three years ago, Phillip Loughlin made a choice he knew would brand him as an outsider with many of his fellow hunters:

He decided to shoot "green" bullets.

"It made sense," Loughlin said of his switch to more environmentally friendly ammo, which doesn't contain lead. "I believe that we need to do a little bit to take care of the rest of the habitat and the environment -- not just what we want to shoot out of it."

Lead, a toxic metal that can lower the IQs of children, is the essential element in most ammunition on the market today.

But greener alternatives are gaining visibility -- and stirring controversy -- as some hunters, scientists, environmentalists and public health officials worry about lead ammunition's threat to the environment and public health.

Hunting groups oppose limits on lead ammunition, saying there's no risk and alternatives are too expensive.

The scope of the trend is difficult to measure. Americans spent an estimated $1.08 billion on ammunition in fiscal year 2008, according to tax reports from the Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau. But the bureau does not track ammunition sales by type.

Industry groups are tight-lipped about their sales figures. Manufacturers contacted by CNN declined to release specific numbers.

Barnes Bullets, which manufactures copper bullets because, the company says, they perform better than lead, is seeing increased interest in its non-lead products, said Jessica Brooks, the Utah company's spokeswoman.

Loughlin, of Union City, California, has noticed new manufacturers jumping into the green bullet game.

"They're definitely coming out. Winchester and Remington, all the big-name ammo makers are loading green ammunition now," he said.

Some firing ranges are banning lead for safety reasons. Lead bullets contaminate military training grounds across the country and are the subjects of many environmental cleanups.

California and other state governments have taken up lead bullets as a matter of policy. They worry that lead from the bullets contaminates ecosystems and could affect people.

Last year, California banned lead bullets in the chunk of the state that makes up the endangered California condor's habitat. The large birds are known to feed on scraps of meat left behind by hunters. Those scraps sometimes contain pieces of lead bullets, and lead poisoning is thought to be a contributor to condor deaths.

Arizona, another condor state, gives out coupons so hunters can buy green ammunition. Utah may soon follow suit.

In North Dakota, a hunter has raised concerns about lead's potential impact on humans.

Dr. William Cornatzer, a dermatologist and falconer, saw a presentation about the potential dangers of lead at a board meeting of the Peregrine Fund, a group devoted to conserving birds of prey. He decided to collect and test venison samples that were going to be donated to a local program for the hungry. About half of the 100 samples -- all shot by hunters -- tested positive for lead, he said. Food banks and shelters pulled the meat from their shelves after the report.

"When we did this, I about fell out of my shoes," he said. "The scary thing is these fragments are almost like dust in the meat. They're not like metal fragments you would feel when you bite down."

States in the area started investigating the issue after Cornatzer's findings.

Working with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the North Dakota Department of Health ran a test to find out the health effects of lead-shot game. The agency compared blood-lead levels of people who regularly eat meat shot with lead bullets with the levels of those who don't eat much wild game.

The results were inconclusive. Those who ate the lead-shot meat had slightly higher blood-lead levels than those who didn't, but none of the 738 people in the study had levels above the government's threshold for danger.

Still, the health department recommended that children younger than 6 and pregnant women stop eating venison shot with lead bullets because those groups are at particular risk for lead poisoning, even at low levels.

The department also recommended lead-free bullets as the simplest solution to possible contamination.

The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources followed with its own study, which found that when lead bullets explode inside an animal, imperceptible particles of the metal can infect meat up to a foot and a half away from the bullet wound -- farther than previously thought.

More research is needed to tell for sure if lead-shot meat poses a risk to people, said Dr. Steve Pickard, an epidemiologist at the North Dakota Department of Health. But until that research is done, people should take sensible precautions, he said.

"There is no cause for alarm, but it is another source of lead in the environment," he said of lead ammunition.

Hunting groups say lead bullets pose no risk to people or the environment.

Available studies -- particularly the one from North Dakota -- prove that point, said Ted Novin, spokesman for National Shooting Sports Foundation.

"The CDC study confirmed what hunters have known for centuries: Consuming game hunted with traditional [lead] ammunition has never been shown to pose a health risk to anyone," he said.

Pickard said Novin's group is misrepresenting science.

The NSSF and the National Rifle Association say efforts to ban lead ammunition are veiled attempts to take guns away from hunters. They also point to the fact that lead's main alternative, copper, is more expensive and isn't available in all calibers.

Novin said the added expense will drive many people away from a sport that is part of American heritage.

"Many hunters believe lead is the best metal to be used for hunting," he said. "Add into that that it [lead] is very affordable and it is very available. We think this absolutely should be left up to hunters."

Dr. Joseph Graziano, interim department chair of environmental health sciences at Columbia University's Mailman School of Public Health, said the public should switch away from lead bullets -- even if the research is still developing.

"It's hard to imagine that you could make a bullet out of something more toxic than lead," he said.

Loughlin, who switched to green ammo and blogs on the issue, said that lead shouldn't be banned from hunting but that hunters and the public should be more aware of lead's potential to cause harm.

"Lead will get into you, and we need to be working towards getting it out of the system," he said. "I think it's something we could do away with over time."
This is how things subversively creep into the social consciousness. . . it'll be absolute, scientific fact in the minds of most sheeple by the end of the year. :mad5
Native Texian
Medino
Member
Posts: 77
Joined: Mon Feb 09, 2009 2:51 pm
Location: Weimar, TX

Re: More anti-lead propaganda

Post by Medino »

Lets take into consideration how much lead the average hunter will be dispensing in an average year just while hunting. lets say he takes a deer and a two hogs every year for 30 years. Lets say he is not using an over powered gun and every 3rd round stays in the animal. That is 2 rounds per year so a total of 60 rounds over 30 years that is spread out over some 100-500 square yards. Do you really think that would make much of a difference.

Gun ranges already have to deal with the EPA for disposal of the lead they accumulate. Any private range will be a very local problem and will not have nearly the volume that a public range will have. Lead is cheap, heavy, and deforms well to make a bigger wound channel that is why we use it. If there was an issue why don't we see some areas where large battles took place a long time ago having toxic water with dead plants everywhere.

As far as eating the lead. I am sure that there is a maybe a slightly larger amount as compared to what you can get through drinking water and various other foods. I personally avoid the meat on the edge of the wound we either toss it for the coyotes or to our dogs. The larger pieces should be harder to absorb than the smaller particulates in the water and are therefore more likely to pass though without a problem.
Last edited by Medino on Wed Mar 04, 2009 2:42 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Personally, I’m interested in keeping other people from building Utopia, because the more you believe you can create heaven on earth the more likely you are to set up guillotines in the public square to hasten the process.--James Lileks
User avatar
flb_78
Senior Member
Posts: 1277
Joined: Sat Oct 13, 2007 11:17 am
Location: Gravel Switch, KY
Contact:

Re: More anti-lead propaganda

Post by flb_78 »

Where did all this EVIL lead come from to begin with? Are we creating it through some miracle of science? Does NASA bring it back from space?
http://www.AmarilloGunOwners.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
User avatar
fickman
Senior Member
Posts: 1711
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2008 2:52 pm
Location: Fort Worth, Texas

Re: More anti-lead propaganda

Post by fickman »

flb_78 wrote:Where did all this EVIL lead come from to begin with? Are we creating it through some miracle of science? Does NASA bring it back from space?
"rlol"
Native Texian
User avatar
Liberty
Senior Member
Posts: 6343
Joined: Mon Jul 03, 2006 8:49 pm
Location: Galveston
Contact:

Re: More anti-lead propaganda

Post by Liberty »

I want my bullets to be as toxic as possible on the creature I might happen to shoot.
Is it possible to get 9MM depleted uranaium? I'll settle for the undepleted too.
Liberty''s Blog
"Today, we need a nation of Minutemen, citizens who are not only prepared to take arms, but citizens who regard the preservation of freedom as the basic purpose of their daily life and who are willing to consciously work and sacrifice for that freedom." John F. Kennedy
User avatar
DoubleJ
Senior Member
Posts: 2367
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 9:29 am
Location: Seattle, Washington

Re: More anti-lead propaganda

Post by DoubleJ »

flb_78 wrote:Where did all this EVIL lead come from to begin with? Are we creating it through some miracle of science? Does NASA bring it back from space?
my folks all live up in Washington, where they recently had this afront on their sensibilities.

I tol' my dad the hunters were just being benevolent enough to put the lead back into the ground, so that future generations mine it and cast into ammunition themselves! :lol:
FWIW, IIRC, AFAIK, FTMP, IANAL. YMMV.
BigRon
Member
Posts: 49
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2009 12:44 am

Re: More anti-lead propaganda

Post by BigRon »

One more assault on our rights. Yes, lead bullets are dangerous. Especially about 230 grains of it travelling at 850 feet per second. What a crock! :banghead:
God is so good to me.

Duty, Honor, Country
ghostrider
Senior Member
Posts: 1758
Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2007 12:05 am
Location: Free Republic of Texas

Re: More anti-lead propaganda

Post by ghostrider »

>Still, the health department recommended that children younger than 6 and pregnant women stop
>eating venison shot with lead bullets because those groups are at particular risk for lead poisoning,
>even at low levels.

now that's a real stretch. do they think deer is shot with several rounds of #8 dove shot and people are ingesting pellets?
NRA Member
Amateur Radio Operator
Pinkycatcher
Senior Member
Posts: 490
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 4:25 pm
Location: Fort Worth

Re: More anti-lead propaganda

Post by Pinkycatcher »

Those scraps sometimes contain pieces of lead bullets, and lead poisoning is thought to be a contributor to condor deaths.
The worst policy is based on "thought"

Did they take into account most of the people who eat lead shot meat might live in a geographically different area? That could effect the results, or a hundred other factors. Hunters and non-hunters are generally two different sets of people with many different variables similar within the group which are different from the other group.

I'm just saying a negligible difference in blood lead levels in a test between two different groups that may or may not differ on more than one variable is not something to base public policy on, especially with one study.
Post Reply

Return to “General Gun, Shooting & Equipment Discussion”