collapse
Double U Hunting Supply Advertise on Hunting-Washington

Author Topic: BAN OF TRADITIONAL AMMUNITION - WASHINGTON HUNTERS: LET YOUR VOICES BE HEARD!!!  (Read 8600 times)

Offline huntinguy

  • Hunter
  • ***
  • Join Date: May 2011
  • Posts: 116
  • Location: Washington
"California has pushed for these additional lead bans even though data from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) shows that the state's existing lead ban has not reduced blood-lead levels in condors. Despite reports of nearly 100 percent compliance from hunters in the first year of the lead ban, a California Department of Fish and Game (DFG) report utilizing the USFWS data showed that improvement in condor blood-lead levels was almost negligible between the first six months of 2008 (pre-lead ban) and the second half of 2008 (post-ban). During the January through June 2008 time frame, 59 percent of the condors tested had blood-lead levels above what is considered a normal or acceptable background level. In the second half of the year from July through December, 45 percent of condors had blood-lead levels above normal. (Source: "Lead Ban Not Really Helping Condors," Jim Matthews, San Bernardino Sun, July 30, 2009) "

what people are not asking is- where is the lead coming from? It is assumed hunters... but...

It sickens me when I see hunters not sticking together.

we need to learn... but we won't

"First They Came for the Jews"
By Pastor Niemoller

First they came for the Jews and I did not speak out because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the Communists and I did not speak out because I was not a Communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists and I did not speak out because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for me and there was no one left to speak out for me.

Offline Shoffy

  • Hunter
  • ***
  • Join Date: Jan 2011
  • Posts: 109
  • Location: Sumner, WA
Every Chukar I have ever shot has died from lead poisoning. Specifically high velocity lead poisoning.  :guns:
Maybe they can use that in there next study.
:yeah: hahaha me too!

Offline Special T

  • Be careful what you say the MAN is listening!
  • Washington For Wildlife
  • Old Salt
  • *****
  • Join Date: Aug 2009
  • Posts: 8897
  • Location: Skagit Valley
  • It's Just How I Roll
    • https://www.facebook.com/pages/Silver-Arrow-Bowmen/254843291966
    • Silver Arrow Bowmen
"Sadly, one can slant a [supposedly scientific] study to suit any end."


That is the real issue.  To have credible science to base decisions on, the researcher has to be totally unbiased.  That creature doesn't exist for the most part.  Everyone, including those doing research have opinions on issues, and those opinions influence outcomes.

Ask anyone who has worked for a Marketing Firm this question. Is there a large portion of your customers that are trying to prove a point? Thier answer will be YES! The $$$ to do a survey or science is NOT funded from altrueistic donors. There is an adjenda everytime $$$ is spent. Some of it is more honest than others.

The only way to get an honest answer is to pay $$$ in advance to someone who has no dog in the fight... People don't tend to shell out those kinds of amounts first and ask for answers later.  :twocents:
“You cannot antagonize and influence at the same time.” – John Knox

Offline Stilly bay

  • Off-Topics
  • Sourdough
  • *****
  • Join Date: Jul 2010
  • Posts: 1421
  • ELITIST WEST SIDE DITCH PARROT HUNTER


opposition because another part of our hunting heritage is being closed off is one thing... arguing that shooting tons of poisonous lead into an environment that is normally lead free is completely harmless, is just ignorant in this day and age.

everyone has their own agenda, but opposing the lead ban is just going to make hunters look bad in the end. what it looks like on paper is that we are introducing lead into the soil and leaving it in crippled game birds that will in turn poison endangered birds of prey. this is a fight we are just not going to win, and as a hunter and conservationist I don't know that we should win it.

steel shot has never been cheaper or more effective. there are nontoxic alternatives that are safe for us to use in all our older guns. Steel target loads are cheaper than most lead, steel game loads are cheaper than many lead game loads, steel shot is no longer the enemy come to piss on your picnic. times are changing. if we embrace nontoxic shot as many states already have, we can stand tall that besides the occasional shell casing, we are not polluting the environment with a metal that is known to be poisonous.  in the end we might earn the respect of more people who are indifferent to hunting.  its the year 2012, we are damned lucky we still can hunt and have places to do it from this point forward if we don't go green, we might as well just go home.

how many businesses get high praise for doing what is right for the environment? how many get flamed for not? this will come into play with hunters, and I can't believe haven't been nailed to the cross for it already.
at face value this argument seems to be a matter of the dreaded "antis" trying to make us (hunters) do something, there fore we will resist it just on principle no matter where it stacks up in reality.  I see our opposition in this entire affair as a terrific way to shoot ourselves in the foot in the eyes of the vast public, and a good way to loose the support of people who don't hunt but aren't against it, which -in case you research waiving people don't know- is a bigger threat than the shenanigans of the anti's.

"Love the dogs before loving the hunt; love the hunt for the dogs." - Ben O. Williams

“It is easy to forget that in the main we die only seven times more slowly than our dogs.”
― Jim Harrison

Offline Special T

  • Be careful what you say the MAN is listening!
  • Washington For Wildlife
  • Old Salt
  • *****
  • Join Date: Aug 2009
  • Posts: 8897
  • Location: Skagit Valley
  • It's Just How I Roll
    • https://www.facebook.com/pages/Silver-Arrow-Bowmen/254843291966
    • Silver Arrow Bowmen
I think there is a BIG difference between Bird shot and rifle bullets.  :twocents: It can be argued that in areas of high concentration(like many public waterfowl areas) that Lead can be a problem. Fortunatly there are already laws aginst using lead in most areas with hight concentrations of hunters. EVEN FOR PHESANT! There are some areas in E wa that require steel shot. 90% of the logical things have been done to prevent lead posioning, the rest is just acting on fear.  :twocents:
“You cannot antagonize and influence at the same time.” – John Knox

Offline TWG2A

  • Off-Topics
  • Longhunter
  • *****
  • Join Date: Feb 2010
  • Posts: 551
They (the EPA) no longer needs to pursue banning lead to keep us from using firearms. The obama regime can simply go after the smokeless powder used to manufacture ammunition.

Here in Montana, our legislature convenes every two years for 90 days.  During the 2011 session, we proposed legislation which would have protected Montanans from this problem.

Montana SB 371

Here's some reading on the issue.

http://www.ammoland.com/2010/10/26/loss-of-smokeless-powder-the-greatest-threat-to-keep-bear-arms/#axzz1tZAGkPUt

SB 371 Rerouted
http://montanahuntingtoday.com/blog/index.php/2011/04/08/sb-371-rerouted/

The bill died in Committee..   We'll be back next year.

Offline huntinguy

  • Hunter
  • ***
  • Join Date: May 2011
  • Posts: 116
  • Location: Washington
the argument is not just about "toxicity in the environment" there is much more to it than that.

Studies of shooting ranges have shown little if any leaching of lead to the surrounding areas.

a body will encase "any" foreign body that enters it... and it will fester (heavens knows I have had enough stainless, supposedly not reactive, chunks in my body that have festered and came out.  I have seen wounds from broadheads that have been terrible, and they are steel.

I understand the toxicity of lead. I used to work in a place that required everyone to be tested twice a year. But, the question is - does it cause harm to animals that may consume another animal that has been shot. Let’s do some math here... just how many wild animals get away with a pellet in them? how many animals die of natural causes? Does it even sound reasonable that hunters cause much swing in the balance of naturally occurring contamination? maybe in some flyways and in some release sights. There I could say yes or maybe... but in the open field?

Also, toxicity from lead is not a permanent situation, it does leave the body.

This is little more than another way to restrict if not outright prohibit hunting.

I have seen little data to change my mind. I am waiting………

 



Quick Links


* Random Photo New

Logo

Views: 132
Posted by: Ray
in: Ray's Gallery

* Recent Topics

Raynonier permits by BigGoonTuna
[Today at 04:35:46 AM]


sell: Vap penetrator 2 inserts by Kyle1112
[Today at 03:59:32 AM]


Now I get it! by GrainfedMuley
[Today at 03:50:31 AM]


who's who Borders by GrainfedMuley
[Today at 03:47:45 AM]


This guy is quick by GrainfedMuley
[Today at 03:29:07 AM]


Re: Word Association Game by GrainfedMuley
[Today at 03:04:29 AM]


Re: Chain Reaction Game by GrainfedMuley
[Today at 03:03:09 AM]


What's your poison for grouse? by Sitka_Blacktail
[Today at 02:50:00 AM]


Methow Valley Fires by fish vacuum
[Today at 02:26:07 AM]


Wolf in klickitat by carpsniperg2
[Today at 01:48:04 AM]


wtb super cheap shotgun by GUscottie
[Today at 01:36:00 AM]


In need of some insight from other spouses/family members by runamuk
[Today at 01:12:10 AM]


XTP shooters, what are you using for an aligner/starter? by Wose
[Today at 12:44:10 AM]


Bigfoot by runamuk
[Today at 12:40:21 AM]


Shooting Fails by Elliott
[Today at 12:32:22 AM]


SimplePortal 2.3.3 © 2008-2010, SimplePortal